Jump to content


Players Questions and Developers Answers


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

TK3600 #181 Posted Jan 28 2012 - 05:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 11788 battles
  • 7,034
  • Member since:
    03-13-2011
when will we have ability to talk to talk to your platoon mate only in game chat?

Drakenred #182 Posted Jan 28 2012 - 21:16

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15243 battles
  • 1,782
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011
Valter: Quick question, are you guys looking at authenticators (simular to whats used in SWTOR WoW EvE(I think thoes may be comeing soon, not sure) or are they refering to something else with "Number IDs"


@SpectreHD some of the wireframes they have posted elsewhere are mockups that are not used by the game engine, they were simply done to show what they ment in the coversation.

In fact its not realy that hard to get an idea of what they would be without them given the sources that are publicaly avalible

SirW00f #183 Posted Jan 29 2012 - 06:19

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 27333 battles
  • 50
  • [TRI4D] TRI4D
  • Member since:
    01-07-2012
in the game...the crew stats..what are modifiers?

justniz #184 Posted Jan 30 2012 - 19:08

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 21942 battles
  • 18
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011
Saw the "super shell" bug again last night.
Someone's shots passing unchecked right through a large rock. The trace came out at the center of the other side of the rock and the shot caused damage to a tank that was actually safely hidden.
When will this really annoying bug get fixed? Or was it a hack?

Drakenred #185 Posted Jan 30 2012 - 20:54

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15243 battles
  • 1,782
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011
ok first off next time your in game hit caplock 0 to turn on server side curser. thats the Server side "sights" bascialy where the Server thinks your shooting

second, realise that thanks to something Called Lag (theres a Lag meter on your Screen at all times unless you disable it) theres a delay between where everyone in the match thinks there doing and what the Server "knows" is going on.

Third realise that as far as the game server is concerned your tank and everyone elses tank is not where you or your PC think it is, Its where THE SERVER thinks it is

Forth because of this fact the game will tell your PC to draw a line from where your computer thinks His tank is to your computer thiks your tank is. Especialy when your playing Peekabo this will occasionaly result in weird hit results  "hits through walls" shots that somehow pass through freindly tanks that drive into your line of fire and TK hits on tanks that you would have sworn were NOT in your line of fire when you shot.

Also this results in a lot of "Ghost shells" because your client for whatever reason thinks it was told to render shots that the Server decided hit someplace else

Also because of this the server will send you a legal hit from tank unknown but with a vector and your machine will occasionaly screw up and draw it as comeing from a tank "near" that point because your client is rigged to make thoes "Lag corrections"(Ive killed enough people hidding from another tank beind a building with my SPG who then screaming about the guy on the other side of the wall useing a hack that I hoped onto a private match and finaly realised what was going on.

it took about 3 reloads useing a T57

Jiri_Starrider #186 Posted Jan 30 2012 - 22:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 7550 battles
  • 2,415
  • [TB] TB
  • Member since:
    09-28-2010
Can we have this thread redirect to the EU Q&A?
As the EU Wiki thread redirects to the NA one.

Thanks

Finli #187 Posted Jan 30 2012 - 22:27

    Private

  • Players
  • 4711 battles
  • 3
  • [STUG] STUG
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011
After the rebalancing (or to some people, nerfing) of HE ammunition, the VK2801 appears rather lacklustre compared to the other two T5 Scout Lights due to its primary feature being the 105 gun, which is almost always used to shoot HE. Is there a chance for the 2801 to be reexamined, either for an attribute change to compensate for the less effective weaponry, or the possibility of it receiving another potential gun, such as the 7.5cm/L70?

TheGhostCat #188 Posted Feb 01 2012 - 04:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 20163 battles
  • 6,631
  • [LAMDA] LAMDA
  • Member since:
    05-13-2011
Why have income for damaging higher tier tanks been removed? This seems like a great way to kill off your lower tier player base or simply discourage players from advancing in the game.

Removal of this factor also seems to make playing lower tier, tier 5 especially, premium tanks rather pointless, given that then have much weaker guns then their non-premium counter-parts.

I'm struggling to understand how this contributes to tier balance in the game, given that part of the concept was for players to return to the lower tiers to 'fund' their higher tier tanks.

Thanks.

Edit: I am referencing this thread:
http://forum.worldof...-tier-vehicles/

Skarloc #189 Posted Feb 01 2012 - 07:13

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 8935 battles
  • 263
  • Member since:
    03-15-2011
Are the vision mechanics being looked at because you cannot tell me IS3 in the open, moving goes invis to my t34 at 100 meters while tracking it \ aiming is working.  Its not lag, its not L2p, its not learn how the system works.  My competer is fine, no lag, 50 meg connection and a 1 gig video card.  Honestly is this being looked at or are all vision mechanic issues considered closed?

Drakenred #190 Posted Feb 01 2012 - 19:42

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15243 battles
  • 1,782
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011
This may sound odd but why havent we been asked for our system information the way you have on RU? or is that comeing soontm

justniz #191 Posted Feb 01 2012 - 23:26

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 21942 battles
  • 18
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View PostDrakenred, on Jan 30 2012 - 20:54, said:

ok first off next time your in game hit caplock 0 to turn on server side curser. thats the Server side "sights" bascialy where the Server thinks your shooting

second, realise that thanks to something Called Lag (theres a Lag meter on your Screen at all times unless you disable it) theres a delay between where everyone in the match thinks there doing and what the Server "knows" is going on.

Third realise that as far as the game server is concerned your tank and everyone elses tank is not where you or your PC think it is, Its where THE SERVER thinks it is

Forth because of this fact the game will tell your PC to draw a line from where your computer thinks His tank is to your computer thiks your tank is. Especialy when your playing Peekabo this will occasionaly result in weird hit results  "hits through walls" shots that somehow pass through freindly tanks that drive into your line of fire and TK hits on tanks that you would have sworn were NOT in your line of fire when you shot.

Also this results in a lot of "Ghost shells" because your client for whatever reason thinks it was told to render shots that the Server decided hit someplace else

Also because of this the server will send you a legal hit from tank unknown but with a vector and your machine will occasionaly screw up and draw it as comeing from a tank "near" that point because your client is rigged to make thoes "Lag corrections"(Ive killed enough people hidding from another tank beind a building with my SPG who then screaming about the guy on the other side of the wall useing a hack that I hoped onto a private match and finaly realised what was going on.

it took about 3 reloads useing a T57


It wasn't lag related. The firing tank hadn't moved for at least 10 seconds. The hidden tank hadn't moved for about 20 seconds, consequently they would have been actually where the server thought they were, and no lag is as bad as that.
Regardless of their actual positions, and any lag, it was clear that the shot WENT THROUGH A BOULDER.

Onyx #192 Posted Feb 02 2012 - 00:09

    Major

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

View PostVallter, on Jan 23 2012 - 14:55, said:

First, hit models are our Intellectual Property and something we don't want neither published nor being spread throughout the Internet. Because this may cause a lot of problems with so called 'hit-box skins' and some other features, which will force us to encode the entire client.

Secondly, it was done to make a simpler the crew transaction from tank to tank. In future there are plans to remove it.

I actually want to ask a follow-up question for this.

While the desire for secrecy on the exact hitbox model is understandable, most hitboxes are based on reality anyways.

Given enough understanding of the game mechanics and a suitable reference, such as an image like this:
Spoiler                     
one is capable of figuring out where a lot of modules are in the tank in-game.  However, the availability of this information would be either incredibly limited, in the case of prototype and non-production tanks and the like, or incredibly abundant in the case of the Tiger, Panther, King Tiger, Sherman, and so one.

So, with this in mind, why is the secrecy of the models so important when, in some cases, a sufficiently savvy person can acquire all of the information on every tank if they need to, but a person with access to less resources would take significantly longer to acquire the information, if they even can at all?

To me, this creates an even bigger balance issue than someone putting a paint job on the skin to show the approximate internal locations of various models, especially considering that someone with a sufficiently advanced memory is already capable of doing that, provided they have access to enough information, already.

The question at hand, to combine them, why do these models even need to be secret to begin with when a sufficiently resourceful person is capable of finding the information and making an educated guess as to where the modules are in-game anyways?  This creates a bigger game imbalance from those who do know how to find the information versus those who do not, regardless of the use of hit skins at this point.

As a related question, since the armor in this game also in many cases follows reality, why must the armor information, including angle, also be hidden from those who aren't sufficiently resourceful as well, which this causes a substantial difficulty increase versus those who understand these rather abstract concepts versus those who do not?

It is my express belief, then, that information like exact armor layouts, including angling from the nearest plane of the tank (front/side/rear going straight vertical.  E.G. an E-50's front armor would be listed at 120 at 60 degrees from vertical for the upper and lower, while the sides would be taken from the side angle) as well as module locations should be something provided by the developers to even the playing field from those who have access to the information and those who don't.

Otto_matic_Reiffel #193 Posted Feb 02 2012 - 02:28

    Major

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

View PostOnyx, on Feb 02 2012 - 00:09, said:

Spoiler                     
The ingame models with hitboxes are available on external sites and appear 100% accurate. I won't post them here however.

What I would like to see is armour layout schematics. For the most part they would not be Wargamings IP since they are meant to be based on the actual tank, making it someone else's IP except in cases of guessed at prototypes. eg I know the entire front (ignoring lower glacis) of the T28 TD is not 254mm, but good luck finding any info on this.

By the sounds of things the tank designers in the art team should have plenty of time since they have completed models for the next several updates according to Vallter and Overlord. Any chance of redirecting one of them to post up some colour coded pictures of the actual armour layout on the Tankopedia? Since they have the actual info and model files it shouldn't take too long.

Metal_Church #194 Posted Feb 02 2012 - 15:02

    Captain

  • Players
  • 67592 battles
  • 1,410
  • [NEAD] NEAD
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011
:blink:  tired of tanks 20 meters from me killing my tanks and i can never see them. well only time  is after they kill me. this is crazy . dont care how much skill they have in training. blast from muzzle should always give them away.

justniz #195 Posted Feb 02 2012 - 23:02

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 21942 battles
  • 18
  • Member since:
    04-04-2011

View PostMetalChurch, on Feb 02 2012 - 15:02, said:

:blink:  tired of tanks 20 meters from me killing my tanks and i can never see them. well only time  is after they kill me. this is crazy . dont care how much skill they have in training. blast from muzzle should always give them away.

Yeah I completely agree, and strongly wish this was fixed urgently.
I get the point that if you're in a buttoned down tank its hard to see out, but come on, in real life no tank (not even a TD) is going to remain hidden when you're closer than a football pitch away.

As for them being able to fire from a few metres away and still remain undetected, thats just madness. Are the developers seriously proposing that a tank firing really doesn't generate a giant muzzle flash, a ton of smoke, and a bang you can get at least rough direction on from like 5 miles away?

BocageTiger #196 Posted Feb 02 2012 - 23:43

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 43064 battles
  • 117
  • [36THB] 36THB
  • Member since:
    01-07-2012
Hello,

I live in the US and have become an avid Fan of the game over the past several weeks; buying gold and griding out Credits. I have three requests that I would like to have considered. I hope you can reply to me with some general comments.

1. I would like to see the ability to remove Camouflage from a Tank. I have tried to update a Skin and the Default Camo shows through. It would also be nice to switch and save since we paid for it. Your thoughts?

2. It is possible to change the Panzer IV Turret to reflect Shurzen as in the J and H models? The current upgrade is very odd looking and disproportionate to the Tank. I know there is a Skin, however, it does not seem to work.

3. Offer other Nations voices for the Tanks. Is this possible? If not, when.

Thanks for the considerations, I look forward to your reply.

Respectfully,

Mike (BocageTiger)

NoblePlatoon #197 Posted Feb 03 2012 - 01:21

    Captain

  • Players
  • 16690 battles
  • 1,944
  • Member since:
    05-24-2011

View PostJiri_Starrider, on Jan 30 2012 - 22:06, said:

Can we have this thread redirect to the EU Q&A?
As the EU Wiki thread redirects to the NA one.

Thanks
It appears that the last time a question was answered by a "Developer" was 7 days ago. I second Jiri Starrider's request.

grimzod #198 Posted Feb 03 2012 - 19:20

    Captain

  • Players
  • 21542 battles
  • 1,281
  • Member since:
    05-22-2011
Can we get a global 'mute all dead' button in settings to auto - temp ignore ALL dead peopel in a match?

Manually ignoring the distracting scapegoating mass of dead people in games can lose a match for the team.

Onyx #199 Posted Feb 04 2012 - 00:25

    Major

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

View PostOtto_matic_Reiffel, on Feb 02 2012 - 02:28, said:

The ingame models with hitboxes are available on external sites and appear 100% accurate. I won't post them here however.

What I would like to see is armour layout schematics. For the most part they would not be Wargamings IP since they are meant to be based on the actual tank, making it someone else's IP except in cases of guessed at prototypes. eg I know the entire front (ignoring lower glacis) of the T28 TD is not 254mm, but good luck finding any info on this.

By the sounds of things the tank designers in the art team should have plenty of time since they have completed models for the next several updates according to Vallter and Overlord. Any chance of redirecting one of them to post up some colour coded pictures of the actual armour layout on the Tankopedia? Since they have the actual info and model files it shouldn't take too long.

Yes, I understand this.  The more important thing is, Valter has effectively directly threatened the players in encrypting this information so that only hackers would have access to it, if not outright removing it from the client directly, which only creates more confusion in a game that for the most part doesn't have any.

I'd like to see armor layouts, which is why I put it out, but the last thing I want to see is players who don't know where to find the module information being at an even larger disadvantage than what would then be hackers decrypting the files and creating hit skins with information that literally cannot be accessed in a legit way at that point.

It is an IP, but intellectual properties aren't created to hide content.  They're created to protect content from unlawful copy and profit off of someone else's creation.  To that end, they should be public domain for the players for the express use as a reference guide.  Same with the armor layouts.  And, if the devs want to protect the hitboxes from other people using them, then by all means, I have no problem with this.  But this is still the kind of information the players deserve to know to create a more competitive and fair environment within the game itself without having to resort to breaking the EULA/ToS/ToU/etc in the process.

FaustianQ #200 Posted Feb 04 2012 - 01:51

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18719 battles
  • 7,726
  • Member since:
    07-13-2010

View PostOnyx, on Feb 04 2012 - 00:25, said:

Yes, I understand this.  The more important thing is, Valter has effectively directly threatened the players in encrypting this information so that only hackers would have access to it, if not outright removing it from the client directly, which only creates more confusion in a game that for the most part doesn't have any.

I'd like to see armor layouts, which is why I put it out, but the last thing I want to see is players who don't know where to find the module information being at an even larger disadvantage than what would then be hackers decrypting the files and creating hit skins with information that literally cannot be accessed in a legit way at that point.

It is an IP, but intellectual properties aren't created to hide content.  They're created to protect content from unlawful copy and profit off of someone else's creation.  To that end, they should be public domain for the players for the express use as a reference guide.  Same with the armor layouts.  And, if the devs want to protect the hitboxes from other people using them, then by all means, I have no problem with this.  But this is still the kind of information the players deserve to know to create a more competitive and fair environment within the game itself without having to resort to breaking the EULA/ToS/ToU/etc in the process.

I had suggested it a long time ago, but an "Inspection" tab could resolve this. Basically, it's a visual debug mode which displays all the stats for a tank at it's core. This way people have access to the information as a learning tool, but the client side files could be encrypted to hell and back to increase security and prevent reverse engineering. Plus, with such a "mode" people would be less incentivized to decrypt or otherwise misuse the files.

Valter, is such a thing as "Inspection" on the table for consideration?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users