Jump to content


Players Questions and Developers Answers


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

Ecthel013 #121 Posted Jan 13 2012 - 02:43

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 2890 battles
  • 58
  • Member since:
    08-22-2010
What does damaging the fuel tank do? I read around that it increases the chance of catching on fire by 50% in the Archived Player Questions & Developer Answers thread, but someone pointed me to a dev answer on the Russian forum that contradicts this, so I'm rather confused.

osallivan #122 Posted Jan 13 2012 - 08:49

    Private

  • Players
  • 5390 battles
  • 7
  • [UEF] UEF
  • Member since:
    12-13-2011
So straight forward to my question:

I live in Toronto, Canada. Obviously I had to register and download the US version of the game. BUT, I do speak Russian and would like to know weather if there is a way to set the game language to Russian (I want to hear Russian voices in Russian tanks...). What if I will download the EU version of the game, will I be able to play on US servers, or will it automatically try to connect me to EU servers? (I know the EU version has Russian). I just don't understand, was that a big problem to add Russian localization to the US version!? (especially that it is a Russian game)  <_<

If there is no way to set up Russian, I suggest and request it in future updates!
Also, in my humble opinion, that system with 2 different clients for the game, is a little confusing...

Sincerely,
Alex aka osallivan

Pirx #123 Posted Jan 13 2012 - 09:27

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 118
  • Member since:
    10-30-2011

View Postosallivan, on Jan 13 2012 - 08:49, said:

I want to hear Russian voices in Russian tanks...
Did you try replacing US client original sound files with EU client Russian sound files? If I understand correctly, it's the Russian voices you're after, not necessarily the whole game in Russian.

I play on EU server, and I've been able to have the whole game in English with only voices in my native language.

Changing the EU client's language is done by the launcher simply replacing the sound files, so while I cannot guarantee it will work on US client, I suppose it will. Worth a try anyway.

cipher12 #124 Posted Jan 13 2012 - 12:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 11752 battles
  • 7,334
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011
Recently the stats for the Churchill's front armor has increased to 176 mm can you tell us which part of its front armor is now 176 because it very rarely bounces anything below that.

Otto_matic_Reiffel #125 Posted Jan 13 2012 - 14:37

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 7046 battles
  • 2,008
  • Member since:
    11-16-2010

View Postcipher12, on Jan 13 2012 - 12:34, said:

Recently the stats for the Churchill's front armor has increased to 176 mm can you tell us which part of its front armor is now 176 because it very rarely bounces anything below that.
It's the little bit around the MG port on the front of the hull. You can see the extra armour bolted on.

Otto_matic_Reiffel #126 Posted Jan 14 2012 - 08:49

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 7046 battles
  • 2,008
  • Member since:
    11-16-2010
Is the distribution of shots within the reticle altered by the skill of the gunner? I swear my low skilled gunners shoot at the outside edge of the reticle more often than my skilled gunners.

Timbrelaine #127 Posted Jan 14 2012 - 15:33

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 1667 battles
  • 288
  • Member since:
    04-05-2011

View PostOtto_matic_Reiffel, on Jan 14 2012 - 08:49, said:

Is the distribution of shots within the reticle altered by the skill of the gunner? I swear my low skilled gunners shoot at the outside edge of the reticle more often than my skilled gunners.

It's a standard Gaussian distribution. The gunner effects the size of a reticle- to test this, simply place an experienced gunner in barracks, and get a free 50% skill gunner on the tank, go to training mode, and be horrified at the difference.

Glythe #128 Posted Jan 15 2012 - 12:09

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 20799 battles
  • 1,662
  • [ZOUTH] ZOUTH
  • Member since:
    11-12-2010
Do Win/Loss Statistics have any influence on the matchmaker?

45Hawk #129 Posted Jan 15 2012 - 23:25

    Private

  • Players
  • 39382 battles
  • 8
  • [-OPS-] -OPS-
  • Member since:
    09-17-2011
1. It seems to becoming more common for teammates to rub each other to the point of a duel during the game, which hurts their teammates. What happens to these jokers?
2. I was a real tanker, and it takes quite awhile to fix a track under ideal conditions, I can't imagine trying to do it combat, and yet it happens to be repaired quite quickly.

CanIhaztank #130 Posted Jan 16 2012 - 04:00

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 1809 battles
  • 78
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011
Is there a plan to modify CWs in a way where tier5 lights get to be useful?

Will there ever be a Build your own tank mode?

Tiker #131 Posted Jan 16 2012 - 21:17

    Private

  • Players
  • 22150 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    04-27-2011
I have a question about experience. Where exp. goes after all crew skills are 100 %?

Onyx #132 Posted Jan 17 2012 - 13:37

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 7303 battles
  • 3,356
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-28-2010

View PostTiker, on Jan 16 2012 - 21:17, said:

I have a question about experience. Where exp. goes after all crew skills are 100 %?

As far as I know, the XP continues to accumulate even after the third secondary skill is trained to 100%, since there were plans to add more skills anyways and the system already exists to store more XP than crew training necessarily allows.

Glythe #133 Posted Jan 17 2012 - 22:15

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 20799 battles
  • 1,662
  • [ZOUTH] ZOUTH
  • Member since:
    11-12-2010
When you revamp the match maker would you please bear in mind that currently there is no reason to keep a tier 7 tank? This greatly reduces the number of these tanks in circulation and as a result makes match making worse. There is no reason to keep a tier 6 tank either with the exception being for tier 6 company battles (and most people don't get involved with these judging by the ever present low number of companies. There is little reason to keep a tier 5 tank in the same regard because you tend to get mostly only tier 8 games where you just get turned into a flaming heap. I know when I got my Lowe I sold a few tier 8 tanks because it became my tier 8 vehicle. I have a few tier 8 tanks but I am only keeping them because they lead to tier 9 things. Even less people play the champion company than people play the medium company (about 1/3 as many I would guess).

What's the point I'm trying to make here? People tend to only keep tanks that actually get fair matches with the match maker. The most obvious examples are tier 9 and 10 tanks because they literally can't be too outclassed. The same trend holds with tier 1-2 tanks.

Can we please have a system where tanks can get a tank no more than two tiers above them? That would mean a PIV might see a tiger but it would never see a Lowe, 59, E75 or a Maus.

View PostOnyx, on Jan 17 2012 - 13:37, said:

As far as I know, the XP continues to accumulate even after the third secondary skill is trained to 100%, since there were plans to add more skills anyways and the system already exists to store more XP than crew training necessarily allows.

I believe people mentioned that back in the beta if you had 3 skills fully trained you had a "black box" skill that was basically a place holder for skill 4 which of course never showed up.

I'll be pissed if I don't get to start a 4th skill for my crew that is almost done with skill number three when that patch hits.

Reklaw #134 Posted Jan 18 2012 - 07:05

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12275 battles
  • 827
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011
I have a question. Why does Wargaming have such contempt for the NA server's population that we have no representative and have to use our own player base to answer our own questions?

I have to go to the EU forums and even the RU forums to find out anything, much less have any contact with someone who has any influence on the game. I don't care what your personal life or time is like. SerB answers questions every day. Overlord answers questions every day. If your existing help can't do the job, find someone who can, and do it immediately. The lack of respect and concern you show for this server is unacceptable, especially considering we're the ones paying the most hiked up prices for gold across all three. A lot of us are upset about the new American line, for instance, and the only way to voice concerns about it is to apparently have Russian posters translate our concerns (and theirs, too, from what I've read) to the developers, themselves. I shouldn't have to make any number of passive aggressive posts on an internet forum for that to be a sign that something is very wrong.

billytheid #135 Posted Jan 19 2012 - 12:24

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 2946 battles
  • 168
  • [TOG3A] TOG3A
  • Member since:
    02-03-2011
1). Are the rumors of a British-ish based tank tree founded?

2). Most importantly; will this tree be named the Commonwealth Tank tree as it must include the AC(Australian Cruiser)series ranging from Mk.1 to (paper)Mk.4My link and the heavily armoured Canadian GrizzlyMy link?

The idea of a Commonwealth tree has been raised many times in the suggestions threadMy link and I was wondering if Wargaming is considering it?

3).  If a Commonwealth tree was implemented would it be possible to include a variety of nationalities/armies?  The Royal Armoured Corps for England, ANZACS for Australia and New Zealand, The Royal Canadian Armored Cops and so on?  These small touches would mean quite alot to a great deal of people.

Drakenred #136 Posted Jan 19 2012 - 20:35

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15243 battles
  • 1,782
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011

View Postbillytheid, on Jan 19 2012 - 12:24, said:

1). Are the rumors of a British-ish based tank tree founded?

2). Most importantly; will this tree be named the Commonwealth Tank tree as it must include the AC(Australian Cruiser)series ranging from Mk.1 to (paper)Mk.4My link and the heavily armoured Canadian GrizzlyMy link?


its officialy the next tree they are working on after the French tree.

http://worldoftanks....plan-2011-2012/

of that list, from what I understand. . .(note I sorted out the list based on Feedback from the developers but left their origial estimates on all of it

Patch 7.2
tank destroyers M8A1, T49, M18 Hellcat, T28 prototype - Q1 2012;
heavy tanks M103, T110, tank destroyer T25-2 - Q1 2012.
New crew skills and perks - Starting Q4 2011;
Interface game tutorial - Q4 2011;

Patch 7.3
heavy tanks  KV-1, KV-2, KV-4, Т-150, ST I, Object 252 - Q1 2012.
Battle game tutorial - 2012;

(7."X" however I suspect we may be into 8.X by the time they put all of this in)

Its been implied that the French SPGs are the next patch after the Russian heavy patch, however they have been showing the French TDs, and the Russian-German TD overhaul following that, however they also have implied that they want to bundle things a bit, however with the Tank swaps and moves they are doing in 7.2-7.3 I dont think they will be doing mutch bundleing untill 7.4

SPGs Renault BS, Lorraine 39 L AM, AMX 13 AM 105mm, AMX 13 F3 AM, Lorraine155 (50), Lorraine155 (51), Bаt.-Chatillon AM 155mm - Q1 2012;
OR(maybee And)
tank destroyers Renault FT AC, Lorraine 37 L AC, Somua SAu 40, Somua S 35 CA, ARL V 39, AMX AC Mle.1946, AMX AC Mle.1948, AMX50 Foch - Q1 2012;

tank destroyers SU-100M-1, SU-101, SU-122-54 - Q4 2011;
tank destroyers Marder III, Dicker Max, Nashorn, Sturer Emil, Jagdpanther II, E-100 - Q4 2011;
tank destroyers Pak40 FCM 36 (f), 10.5cm leFH18 B2 (f), Panzerjäger 35R - Q1 2012;

Company battle divisions: tier 10 max with no overall tier limitation, tiers 8, 6, and 4 max with the respective overall tier limitation - Q4 2011;
Assault (one team attacks, the other one defends the base) and Encounter battle (two teams are to capture the base in the center of the map) - Q4 2011;

Garage battle – players can use several tanks (one after another) in one battle (“limited respawn”)  - Q1 2012;
Escort (only a few tanks from the team have the ability to capture enemy's base, the opposite team is to stop potential invaders) - Q1 2012;



medium tank Renault G1R, light tank АМХ 13 FL11 - Q1 2012.
SPGs E-10, E-25, Jagdtiger Sd.Kfz. 185 (88/71) - Q2 2012.

British tanks - Q2 2012

Japanese tanks  - 2012

Historical battle - faction based battles with historically justified restrictions on vehicles and modules available - 2012.

Realistic vehicle physics - Q1 2012;(this needs to have several maps overhauld if not outright replaced due to unplaned/unwanted physics exploits, and aparently they keep finding them)


Extended platoons for up to 5 players - Q1 2012;(dont expect this before summer, they need to upgrade the Russian servers (AGAIN) because they want to put in 30X30 battles first)

National crew voices (crews of each nation speak their mother tongue(accent?)) - 2012;
Commander’s chart - 2012;
Improved chat functionality, official language-based chat subchannels - 2012.

justniz #137 Posted Jan 19 2012 - 22:39

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 21942 battles
  • 18
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011
I was surprised by the recent heavy nerfing of the IS-4.

After a long grind I finally got my IS-4 (just after patch 7.1), and was very disappointed with its competetiveness. I was surprised to find that it feels like it may actually be worse than the IS-3 I "upgraded" from.

Since the most recent patch, the IS-4 now has less armor value on the front than the sides. Is it really true now that (if I cant avoid being shot) I should try and take hits on the side and rather than the front? That seems to make no sense. I cant believe anyone would design a tank like that. Is that historically accurate?

The IS4 feels a lot weaker going up against any other tier 9 tank, and I read the next patch will move it up to tier 10. Are you also planning to re-adjust its stats (upwards this time) to make it more competitive?

lostwingman #138 Posted Jan 19 2012 - 22:53

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 22662 battles
  • 24,283
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View Postjustniz, on Jan 19 2012 - 22:39, said:

I was surprised by the recent heavy nerfing of the IS-4.

After a long grind I finally got my IS-4 (just after patch 7.1), and was very disappointed with its competetiveness. I was surprised to find that it feels like it may actually be worse than the IS-3 I "upgraded" from.

Since the most recent patch, the IS-4 now has less armor value on the front than the sides. Is it really true now that (if I cant avoid being shot) I should try and take hits on the side and rather than the front? That seems to make no sense. I cant believe anyone would design a tank like that. Is that historically accurate?

The IS4 feels a lot weaker going up against any other tier 9 tank, and I read the next patch will move it up to tier 10. Are you also planning to re-adjust its stats (upwards this time) to make it more competitive?

They didn't change the IS-4's armor. The IS-4, like many tanks in the game, does not have a uniform armor value across it's front. The 160 armor that had been listed is the lower glacis, upper glacis has to my knowledge always been 140. Consider for example the M6 and the T1. They have the exact same armor but different values, why? Because one takes the value from the driver plate and the other takes the value from the bowed hull.

Crazy_Basturd #139 Posted Jan 20 2012 - 01:47

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 4736 battles
  • 100
  • [_LMF_] _LMF_
  • Member since:
    01-02-2012
Is there any plan to use weather to add more realistic settings. Many tank battles not only occurred with favorable weather as history has proven. Many battles occurred during a rain storm or snow storm and that would definitely add more danger to the game and balance some of the "long shots" from hidden opponents. Believe me I love being the TD hidden and taking long distant shots.

While on the topic of weather is there any plans to develop early morning and evening or even night combat?

TK3600 #140 Posted Jan 21 2012 - 04:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 11788 battles
  • 7,034
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011
when will we have new achivements?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users