Jump to content


Players Questions and Developers Answers


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

Vallter #21 Posted Nov 29 2011 - 16:46

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostFaustianQ, on Nov 29 2011 - 16:23, said:

Okay, acceptable enough.

Modding WoT is a bit murky as to what players can and can't do, and it's sometimes difficult to understand how to modify it if it's allowed in the first place. Has WarGaming considered something akin to an SDK (Software Development Kit) that contains all files the devs will allow to be modified as well as basic instructions for their usage? Does WarGaming see the modding community as a good thing for World of Tanks?

All that is packed and hidden in the game client (tracers, for example) is forbidden for modding. Because modification of this files will break your client now.

The major part of files that are not packed and can be accessed without usage of any special software can be modified (tank emblems, skins, minimap etc.).

We totally support modding, once it is done to make player's gameplay more comfortable. If they want pink tanks, for example, why should we forbid it? -) But we will always against the following two ways of modding:
- Modding to receive any in-game advantages.
- Mods for sale.

Also sometimes we reward the modders in different ways. We plan probably even to purchase rights for Over Target Markers Mod and make it official.

Unfortunately, we have another things to do besides the tools for fankits. But we have them in mind ;)

Vallter #22 Posted Nov 29 2011 - 16:51

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostFaustianQ, on Nov 29 2011 - 16:43, said:

he is referring to the box set that's supposed to be for "Veteran" players, not the current one available for $20. Awhile ago it was made mention that another, better/bigger box set would be available for purchase that would contain more stuff. A lot of people are wondering if it will be available in time for Christmas this year.

We do plan it, but, probably, it won't be available for Christmas.

Actually we are discussing the possibility to make some kind of online shop where you will be able not only purchase retails-box, but some promo-production (T-Shirts, Mousepads etc.) also.

Vallter #23 Posted Nov 30 2011 - 14:52

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostFaustianQ, on Nov 29 2011 - 17:06, said:

Well, on the note of the unpacked files being allowed to be modified, there is a mod that allows one to zoom out further then standard, and it uses easily modified, unpacked files. Do you consider this a game advantage and thus illegal/forbidden, or is it perfectly acceptable to modify?

To better demonstrate what I mean, here is a pic of another player using it, if you are unaware of it.

Spoiler                     

We are not only aware of it, we've faced it first time in 6.4 and tested it a lot even before the tracers were switched off. This mod can't give any real in-game advantage, so it's usage is not prohibited.


View Postjdeltaarrow, on Nov 29 2011 - 19:07, said:

I think this is the right place to post this.   The 7.0 is coming in Jan or Feb I guess.   I have seen several maps being worked on....Kansas, Mexico, Munich, South America, Big OX.   Will those be coming with it as well.   I saw where they mentioned 2 maps swamp ands somethng else for sure

It will come approximately near the tenth of December, if Tests won't show any major issues.

View Postlostwingman, on Nov 29 2011 - 20:46, said:

With the changes in the way HE shells work making aim a much much larger factor in damaging tanks. Will howitzer gun see some kind of accuracy buff to reflect this? In the past it didn't matter, all you had to do was hit. After 7.0 however tanks like the VK2801 will be nerf'd HARD and there is nothing a player can do about it because outside of 50m its a crap shoot of not just where you will hit but if you will hit. So with that in mind, and with so many tanks balanced around being able to sling HE shells indiscriminately when thrown into matches they shouldn't be in, has there been any thought whatsoever as to what will happen to those tanks?

Surely you remember the 6.7 public test where the 75L48 on the VK28 was considered so underpowered they had to hijack the 105 gun model from the 3001H and shove it onto the tank in the meantime. So it should be obvious to everyone, devs included, that that tank is balanced with the 105 in mind.

Therefore knowing this,  will we get some kind of accuracy buff at least?

Statistics will be gathered during the tests and some tanks will be slightly rebalanced, if necessary. This is everything I can state for now.

The_Chieftain #24 Posted Nov 30 2011 - 17:43

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 12956 battles
  • 9,882
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View Postlucky1, on Nov 30 2011 - 17:21, said:

I'm not sure I didn't find anything like this on the forum so here we go..... On the old version the the main site I could click on FAQ and I found a question that asked what else would be put into this game and infantry were said to be implemented further on in this game to make use of the machine guns on the tanks.... Is this true as of now or have they decided not to anymore???.... And if it is will infantry be playable or computer controlled?

Thanks guys!

My understanding is that infantry are no longer planned, at least in the short term. Apparently the inclusion of people to be seen getting killed will raise the censorship rating of the game to a higher level than the current European 12-and-up, this is also why you see no crew in the open-topped vehicles.

FaustianQ #25 Posted Nov 30 2011 - 22:38

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18719 battles
  • 7,726
  • Member since:
    07-13-2010
Why is the T110 incorrectly using an M48 hull? According to the following, and "Firepower" in general, this is the basic hull design of the T110.

Posted Image

What sources do you have that state the T110 would use the M48 hull?

Vallter #26 Posted Dec 02 2011 - 11:31

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostOrkel2, on Nov 29 2011 - 18:55, said:

Thanks. Just to make sure, which part is the mantlet in WoT? Here is a screenshot with two areas. Red and green.

http://horobox.reage..._1322666527.png

Red = 100mm + 100mm?
Green = just 100mm?

Sorry, my previous answer was wrong. In 7.0 the Mantlet will include all green area on your screenshot.

View Postlucky1, on Nov 30 2011 - 21:38, said:

Ok cool thanx... Now will the side mounted and extra weapons on the tank( ie the machine-guns...) be just strictly ornamental or will they have some use in the future?     And what other tank faction will be added besides French brit and jap?

Thanks guys for all the work you have done in this game and how well it has turned out even! You all (all staff) have been very nice to us even though most complain and b---- about how u guys are "screwing up the game" the rest appreciate your efforts thanks again!!!!!  :Smile_great:

We are planning to make a 'Europe' tree, which will include tanks from different nations, for example, Italian and Polish tanks.

For now we can't see any usage of machine-guns and this is a reason why they won't be developed.

View PostOtto_matic_Reiffel, on Dec 01 2011 - 04:32, said:

The 'unhearable' from next battle thing isn't working. Have had players on my ignore list from previous battles merrily ping spamming away.

Will test again when 7.0 hits. Would rather keep ambient sounds except for those that abuse them.

Seems, that this is a bug. We will investigate this issue.

View PostOrkel2, on Dec 01 2011 - 17:24, said:

Q: Does the size of internal modules effect their health points in general?

For example is a small ammorack easier to blow up than a large one?

Nope, it does not affect the health points of modules. As well as the amount of rounds you take with you in battle.

View PostOtto_matic_Reiffel, on Dec 02 2011 - 01:58, said:

Hi Vallter

Assuming Wargamings efforts to purchase the rights to the OverTargetMarkers mod from the author go quickly, any idea what patch will include this?

We've contacted the author and agreed on giving 10k gold for his work.

AFAIK, he is working on making an OTM version for 7.0.

In upcoming updates we plan to add something similar to the same client, but it will different from current OTM.

All news for now-)

FaustianQ #27 Posted Dec 02 2011 - 17:06

    Major

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

View PostOrkel2, on Dec 02 2011 - 15:36, said:

Thanks!

We tested the mantlet with my friend, and his 160mm penetration gun could reliably damage my tank's health when firing outside the "red area". I'm assuming the mantlet's thickness in the "green area" is much less than 100mm. Is this correct? If so, how thick?

Posted Image

It's what it should be anyway.

Onyx #28 Posted Dec 03 2011 - 05:33

    Major

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

View PostFaustianQ, on Nov 30 2011 - 22:38, said:

Why is the T110 incorrectly using an M48 hull? According to the following, and "Firepower" in general, this is the basic hull design of the T110.

Posted Image

What sources do you have that state the T110 would use the M48 hull?

Looking at this, though I'd like to see an official answer, given the standard +20/-10 degrees of vertical elevation of the main gun, the turret rotated 180 degrees could see some severe clipping through the rear hull due to that compartment in the back.  Did the devs intentionally choose a different design to prevent clipping as much as possible when aiming straight down while looking backwards?

Naeron66 #29 Posted Dec 03 2011 - 06:12

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 578
  • Member since:
    11-12-2010

View PostVallter, on Nov 29 2011 - 15:58, said:

This is something that for now costs the whole Development team a day of work. If we allow this feature before developing functional necessary for making this process quicker, the game will never see more updates.

To expand on this the RU, EU and NA servers each have their own individual player database and currently these separate databases cannot communicate with each other.

For the test server they take a copy of each of these separate databases and load them all onto a single test server database (which is why you get the _US suffix on your account), part of the process selects the account with the highest level of progress in cases where there are accounts with the same e-mail address (when I log onto the test server I see my EU account with 4.7K battles rather than my RU account with 700). These changes require special code and are a one off task each time they prepare a test server.

7.0 starts the multi-clustering work, there will be what I will call a "server group" for each region that has an account server and can have one or more game servers. That is what we see with Common Test 1 and Common Test 2, those 3 servers make up the public test server group but they are still limited to working from a single account server.

As the account server is now separated from the server that runs the actual battles the next step in the development is to allow an account server in 1 server group to communicate with game servers outside its own server group. Once this work is complete what will essentially happen is that you can log in using the account server in the NA server group (which is where your account details are stored and will probably be controlled by which client you use) but you can choose to play your battles on a game server in the NA, Eu or RU server groups.

This step is what will allow clan wars to go global.

Otto_matic_Reiffel #30 Posted Dec 04 2011 - 11:12

    Major

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

View PostTlGERACE, on Dec 03 2011 - 16:29, said:

Dear Developers

is it in patch 7.1 we will see the much awaited German E-100 Jagdpanzer "Krokodil" Super Heavy Tank Destroyer
Spoiler                     
I can tell you that we aren't getting the Krokodil version as in your picture. The one the devs have chosen is a rear-mounted TD, similar to the Ferdinand.

lostwingman #31 Posted Dec 04 2011 - 22:28

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 22777 battles
  • 24,283
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View Postbahzel, on Dec 04 2011 - 18:01, said:

could someone fix the engine hit box on the Lowe 5 time out of 10 when i get hit in the front armor the engine gets damaged and it's in the rear of the tank

German tanks have frontal transmission that is part of engine hit box.

A simple search in the german tank forums would have told you that. Pls use the search function from here on.



Vallter #32 Posted Dec 05 2011 - 15:42

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostOrkel2, on Dec 02 2011 - 15:36, said:

Thanks!
We tested the mantlet with my friend, and his 160mm penetration gun could reliably damage my tank's health when firing outside the "red area". I'm assuming the mantlet's thickness in the "green area" is much less than 100mm. Is this correct? If so, how thick?

The collision Model of Tiger will change in 7.0 . It will be more historically accurate. The picture of Tiger gun's mantlet armour was posted by another user in this thread. In some zones of the green area it will receive a bonus armour from turret. Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to give the details about the collision model according to the policy of Wargaming.net. But having a friend ready for tests and historical material, you will be able to find it out!

View PostPirx, on Dec 03 2011 - 19:09, said:

Shouldn't the amount of compensation be a strictly private matter between the author and WG?

Honest question, as I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be comfortable with WG publicly disclosing and/or discussing their employees' salary - no offence.

(Unless that "10k gold" remark was strictly tongue-in-cheek, of course :P Belarussian humour that got lost in translation somewhat, a la Overlord's usual "we're evil and greedy".)

Only when it's desired by author.

Secondly, it's not his 'salary', 'payment' or whatever. It's just our appreciation.

View PostGodTom, on Dec 04 2011 - 03:52, said:

Not including Company battles, are there any plans to release new game modes in 2011 for the NA server?

They are planned for 2012 Q1-2. They will go in different updates.

View Postcharfreak, on Dec 04 2011 - 12:25, said:

Just thought I'd ask this here rather than just speculate about it in another thread...

with the massive nerf that the 7.5cm konisch has received to balance its gold rounds in relation to relative guns, why has the normal round not received a buff to make it actually worth using??

by extension, when the 3601 becomes a heavy, with the associated teiring and weighting difference, it will need a higher penetrating gun to remain relevant, why not just rebalance the normal credit round to do the same damage per shot as the premium round??  And also why not do it when you're already balancing the gun??

Because konish was overperforming even without gold rounds. But if it changes after the nerf according to statistics, we will fix the issue.

When VK 3601 (H) becomes heavy it will be slightly rebalanced. Currently we are considering different variants.

View PostLouCypher111, on Dec 04 2011 - 23:21, said:

It would be nice to have the Object 704 Cannon traverse back to 44 degrees as it was in Beta, is it being considered and if not could it be, with the introduction of the German E series in a way the Object has been nerfed.

We are satisfied with the way it is.

View PostG00DY, on Dec 05 2011 - 03:58, said:

Hello.

Have a question regarding the amount of artyllery in any given game.It is common to have 4 to 7 arty per game.This is totally takeing the fun out of the game for me and others.I beleive it should be capped at 2 max per side.Are there any plans to do so?

We are planning to make the amount of SPG's in on battle not more than 3-4 once we perform planned matchmaking changes.

View PostAppletree, on Dec 05 2011 - 14:24, said:

Yeah, I know vague general rule such as heavy tank uses class 3 vent and large-caliber rammer, etc. But actual applicability seems to be more complex and confusing. Which tank uses "Mk1 vert. stabilizer" and which tanks uses MK.2? I can not figure out. So I'd like to know more definitive and complete class applicability of these equipment and vehicles like TD, SPG, mediums etc. So I ask devs to clarify on this.

Mk1 is for Mediums only, it's cheaper.
Mk2 is for Heavy tanks mostly, it's more expensive.

You can check the compatibility in the store using filtration per specific vehicle.

Normally difference depends on Tier and class of tanks, though bonuses are the same for all of stabilizers, for example.

Vallter #33 Posted Dec 05 2011 - 15:45

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostTlGERACE, on Dec 03 2011 - 16:29, said:

Dear Developers

is it in patch 7.1 we will see the much awaited German E-100 Jagdpanzer "Krokodil" Super Heavy Tank Destroyer
Spoiler                     
Best regards

Tiger Ace

View PostOtto_matic_Reiffel, on Dec 04 2011 - 11:12, said:

I can tell you that we aren't getting the Krokodil version as in your picture. The one the devs have chosen is a rear-mounted TD, similar to the Ferdinand.

To that I can only add that you won't see it in the 7.1 update, because it will bring mainly French tanks.

Vallter #34 Posted Dec 05 2011 - 15:47

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostDante5521, on Dec 05 2011 - 15:43, said:

is there every going to be a nerf on the t-50 scout tank?? it is a little op when it can do as players of the t-50 and t-50-5 death circle and auto aim and work down tigers and t-59 as well as other scout tanks

No, there are no plans to change it in the nearest future.

Reklaw #35 Posted Dec 06 2011 - 02:15

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12376 battles
  • 827
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011
Obviously this is something up for balancing that the developers won't know exactly, so I'm not asking for stats, but a lot of us are wondering what the developers want to make the gun found on the M103 and T110 into, as far as how it delivers its damage goes.

Storm said it will fire faster, but do they want it to deal low damage at a high rate like the T34's gun, or do they want it to deal moderate damage just a little faster, sort of like the Jagdtiger's gun?

We already have two t10 heavies that deal the damage of a Obj704 and T95 with similar speed/armor, so replicating the principles of the JT on a t10 heavy isn't unfeasible. The concern has been that because the T110 has poor armor and is slower than an IS-7 and won't deal a lot of damage in one shot like the T30, that it needs a truly excellent all-around gun to make it competitive with the other tier 10 heavies. Just as an example, some are wanting a gun that will deal something like 400 damage with a rate of fire of 6-7 rounds a minute, while others want a gun that will deal something more like 550 damage by firing 5-5.5 rounds a minute. Some think the former will make it worthless while others think the latter will make it generic.

So, do they want it to be really fast, low damage, or kind of fast, medium damage?

FaustianQ #36 Posted Dec 06 2011 - 21:57

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18719 battles
  • 7,726
  • Member since:
    07-13-2010
Valter, you still haven't answered my question.

SpectreHD #37 Posted Dec 07 2011 - 08:03

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16844 battles
  • 17,160
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View Postlostwingman, on Dec 07 2011 - 03:26, said:

He probably doesn't have an answer.

Either because he has been told to stay quiet on the matter or they haven't given him an answer at all...

Probably the reason for my question in regards to the M36 and M10. The M18 would probably be no different.

Vallter #38 Posted Dec 08 2011 - 15:49

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10 battles
  • 1,521
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostChewie, on Dec 05 2011 - 16:20, said:

From what I've experienced (and I tried this last night), you can only filter by vehicles you already own.  Thus, I was unable to plan ahead for future tanks, until I found out the wonderful folks at www.wotdb.info placed this information under "Modules".

We will rework it with other interface changes

View PostAppletree, on Dec 05 2011 - 16:48, said:

This does not work because compatibility check only works for vehicles player owns.
Only vehicles in garage appears in vehicle selection menu for compatible equipment list.

I'd like to have complete and definitive table of applicable equipment class for each classed equipment and every vehicles combinations in WOT game, including premium tanks and vehicles that I do not have currently.

You can find it on one of our fan-sites: www.wotdb.info

View Postcharfreak, on Dec 06 2011 - 00:43, said:

65 alpha and ~1105 dpm(ver0.6.7) with the same penetration value ass the soviet 107mm(300 alpha ~2100 dpm) is 'overperforming'?!
yes, the laser accuracy and almost no shell travel time or aim time are nice but most of that was nerfed hard for 0.7.0, as it stands in 0.7.0 the dpm of the credit bought round is ~865, which, for those of you watching at home, is 200 dpm LESS than the stock loltraktor 37mm...

why did it not occur to the devs to address this and increase the damage of the credit bought round??

as it stands in 0.6.7, the konisch (unless trolling with premium rounds) is a unique alternative to the 105 derp when grinding to the top turret to use the 75 l70 and 88 l56 and is better than the 75 l48 simply because 65dmg is better than 0. With 0.7.0 the gun will not ever be used again, as it is entirely pointless with standard rounds and simply 'as good as other guns premium rounds' with the premium rounds.

good to hear that it will be rebalanced when redesignated as a heavy tho :)

For now we think that nerfing konish is enough. If the statistics will show that VK 3601 (H) performance decreased more than necessary, we will perform changes.

View PostOnyx, on Dec 06 2011 - 00:53, said:

Seeing how this answer has one ambiguity, is this per team or per game?  It feels like a per team, but just asking for clarity.

Per team

View PostReklaw, on Dec 06 2011 - 02:15, said:

Obviously this is something up for balancing that the developers won't know exactly, so I'm not asking for stats, but a lot of us are wondering what the developers want to make the gun found on the M103 and T110 into, as far as how it delivers its damage goes.

The question regarding these vehicles was answered before in this thread.

View Postlucky1, on Dec 06 2011 - 06:52, said:

Hey will player ever be able to ... Within friends list and as long as they have been friends for a while... Be able to buy free exp from each other at 25 exp per gold so I want 25000 xp I need to buy then exchange 1000 gold to him in return that way wg gets it's money and we get fun! And u could even put a cap on so like only 3000 worth of gold exp can be exchanged to that friend once a month then it wouldn't be as easy to exploit... Just a though! :Smile_great:

No, we do not plan to have any kinds of XP sales for gold.

View PostSpectreHD, on Dec 07 2011 - 08:03, said:

Probably the reason for my question in regards to the M36 and M10. The M18 would probably be no different.

I have to do some researches, before answering your question. Do not worry, I remember about it.

Unfortunately, I do not know much about American TD line (since I'm not a person, who designed them), so this question needs more time than usual ones.

View PostOtto_matic_Reiffel, on Dec 08 2011 - 03:01, said:

With the hitbox changes in 7.0, are we likely to see a reduction in the number of zero damage hits that should have done damage?

Not for suspension but yes for some modules on different tanks (previous optics damage, for example). Still 'zero damage' will mean damaging a module, but not the vehicle itself. So this feature will be preserved.

The_Chieftain #39 Posted Dec 09 2011 - 20:10

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 12956 battles
  • 9,882
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View PostFaustianQ, on Dec 09 2011 - 19:50, said:

Why, yet again, are you still ignoring my question Valter? Is Wargaming trying to save face here by simply ignoring me?

If it's the T110 question, leave that one to me. I intend to get an answer as well.

Reklaw #40 Posted Dec 12 2011 - 06:37

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 12376 battles
  • 827
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostVallter, on Dec 08 2011 - 15:49, said:

The question regarding these vehicles was answered before in this thread.
No... it wasn't. FaustianQ asked about why it was using the incorrect hull model, and that's been the only mention of the T110. The only thing close is when you described the M103 as being "different," which doesn't address anything at all. A simple "I don't know" will suffice.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users