Jump to content


“You ask, We reply” #12


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

CptBlood #41 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 11:26

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 33636 battles
  • 144
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011
Where is this Q&A thread to ask questions?

linoleumz #42 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 11:58

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11426 battles
  • 565
  • Member since:
    02-10-2011

Quote

Statistics from T34 tank will be moved to M103 without any penalties or bonuses.

NOOOOOOOOOooooooo.... I realize this is consistent with how they've done it in the past but... NOOOOOOOOooooo..! I would prefer if my painful memories in the T34 would just be wiped off the earth, not eternally perpetuated in the M103, thereby tainting the new tank before it even has its first battle. I know I'm being dramatic but I can't help it. T_T

Decrypted #43 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 12:39

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 12945 battles
  • 141
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

View Postlinoleumz, on Feb 24 2012 - 11:58, said:

NOOOOOOOOOooooooo.... I realize this is consistent with how they've done it in the past but... NOOOOOOOOooooo..! I would prefer if my painful memories in the T34 would just be wiped off the earth, not eternally perpetuated in the M103, thereby tainting the new tank before it even has its first battle. I know I'm being dramatic but I can't help it. T_T

I feel your pain... I feel the pain.

BilboTankins #44 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 12:47

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 18383 battles
  • 208
  • Member since:
    07-02-2011

View PostPreston_, on Feb 24 2012 - 07:30, said:

This is false:

"First I would like to point out that 10% of XP you earn for a battle you also receive as a Free XP bonus. Having Premium gives you ability to receive you more XP for each battle and that equals more Free Xp for each battle.
To answer your question, we have no plans to change the current system of XP conversion."

You get 5% free XP with each battle, not 10%.

I think he meant 7.5% relative to a non-premium account that would be 5% since premium gives you a 50% bonus (so ((exp)*1.5)*5%) = exp*7.5%

Cadet_Christmas #45 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 12:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 14340 battles
  • 647
  • Member since:
    04-27-2011

View PostMalikCarr, on Feb 24 2012 - 08:53, said:

I've crossposted this around to various YAWR threads with the hopes of getting a dev to comment on it. I even bumped into Chieftan in-game and asked him on the Soviet heavies forum but apparently he wasn't really sure, so I suppose I'll crosspost it again... :Smile_harp:

----

I have a game design question as far as moving heavy tank IS-4 to Tier X as an alternative line to heavy tank IS-7.

From a design perspective this really doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As it is, IS-4 is an excellent heavy tank - it has a very solid armor scheme that, with angling, can really be difficult to destroy, and with 130mm gun S-70 it can severely maul most enemy tanks just fine.

However, other than the fact that its rear armor is much heavier, IS-7 is basically a more potent and sophisticated design in every way. The sloping on the bow of the hull as well as the turret is especially noticeable - its paper figures are often thinner, but with the richochet physics IS-7 can be very hard to penetrate, even from the sides - especially if its hull is partially concealed.

Historically, IS-4 was a competing design to IS-3. Both were armed with 122mm D-25T - IS-3 made use of a totally new hull with a pike-shaped bow and flat, pancake-like turret, while IS-4 more or less followed IS-2's layout with an angular bow that included a driver's hatch and a turret that was round on the top and bottom (including the irritating shot traps on the edges). IS-3 was unquestionably the more advanced design - it was lower, faster, had a stabler hull layout, and the low heavily rounded turret was basically a testament to Soviet tank design from that point on. IS-4, meanwhile, was essentially just a super heavily reinforced IS-2 with drastically better armor but little else in the way of innovative design features. Compared to IS-7, which had a number of seriously "gee whiz" facilities and equipment to it, IS-4 looks downright primitive even though their development is separated by only a few years.

Now, from a gameplay standpoint, I can see how IS-4 gets bumped over to the "KV" series of heavy tanks. The thing handles a lot like a KV does - it has poor mobility but great armor protection and usually has a big gun. That particular aspect makes perfect sense. What I question, though, is why it belongs on a Tier X platform in the first place.

Historically IS-4 never received the 130mm gun S-70 - that was the IS-7's claim, and the two loaders in that bulbous turret help testify to the necessities of arming such a big piece of artillery. It was tested with 100mm S-34 and 122mm S-34-2, just like the prototype ST-I (which will lead to IS-4 in the new tank line...) but that was all.

So, why move IS-4 to Tier X?

It has exceptionally good armor, but IS-7 is arguably better thanks to the shape and sloping of its hull and turret. It's faster than German heavy tanks, but still significantly slower than IS-7 (especially climbing hills - an E-75 can *almost* keep up on a slope). It has a really big gun, but IS-7 gets that as well, and that particular piece really doesn't make much sense outside of gameplay reasons to keep the tank competitive at its tier.

If you remove the 130mm S-70 from the equation, IS-4 is basically just a much better armored IS-2 with inferior handling - basically what it was in reality.

I'm really just curious if there's a reason for this outside of gameplay purposes. I suppose that's fine, though, since it is a game. After all, on the German tank destroyer line the Ferdinand (early 1943) is a higher tier vehicle than the Jagdpanther (mid-1944), and if you compare their combat ability there's not much to argue with with that order.

Thanks.

EDIT (some personal consideration): It seems that the issue comes from the fact that IS-4 was probably "over built" for Tier 9 in the first place. The reinforced bow (with the "plug" over the driver's hatch) and the inclusion of 130mm S-70 gun, combined with the already excellent armor protection, really made it too much tank for tier 9. But, with the exception of kowtowing to those who've raged about the IS-4's bounciness (something I really have trouble imagining the people who make this game to do...), all I can really conclude is that it's easier to bump the IS-4 up a tier than to nerf it and bounce it *down* where it really ought to belong. Giving the size of the IS-4's turret, I have some difficulty envisioning the crew actually being able to schlep the 130mm shells into S-70's huge breach assembly in the first place... isn't that why IS-7 has two loaders and such a long turret? The Panther got nerfed and kicked down to Tier 7 when the E-series was added to the German tank tree, after all... surely it wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility to do something similar to IS-4?

This is a damn good post. Sooo I had to make sure to quote it so that as many people as possible could read it.

I don't know JACK about Russian tanks or any of that history, but if this guy knows his stuff, his explanation makes a HELL of a lot more sense than the current gameplan. You can tell just by LOOKING at the IS7 that it's a more modern design and heck, it's a fearsome tank to see on the battlefield. Don't know why it's so outreagous or hard to perhaps "dumb down" the IS4 a bit to level the field. I guess too many people would get pissed off though now that they don't have a super tier 9 tank :P

Anyway! Hope the devs read this, I love this idea and post :)

MalikCarr #46 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 13:05

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 5099 battles
  • 450
  • Member since:
    07-31-2011

View PostCadet_Christmas, on Feb 24 2012 - 12:56, said:

This is a damn good post. Sooo I had to make sure to quote it so that as many people as possible could read it.

I don't know JACK about Russian tanks or any of that history, but if this guy knows his stuff, his explanation makes a HELL of a lot more sense than the current gameplan. You can tell just by LOOKING at the IS7 that it's a more modern design and heck, it's a fearsome tank to see on the battlefield. Don't know why it's so outreagous or hard to perhaps "dumb down" the IS4 a bit to level the field. I guess too many people would get pissed off though now that they don't have a super tier 9 tank :P

Anyway! Hope the devs read this, I love this idea and post :)

The only thing the IS-4 really had going for it was ridiculously good armor protection for a tank of its size (140mm frontal plate on the hull with 250mm thick turret). The weight was excessive and it handled poorly - furthermore, it was also difficult to transport. According to the Russian Wikipedia, all 200 IS-4s that were actually built were shipped to the Far East in preparation for the Soviet Union entering into the Korean War, but Stalin's death put an end to that and the tanks never actually saw combat.

It's an evolutionary dead end, so to speak, as far as Russian tanks go. The IS-3 lived on as the IS-8/T-10, which was the last Soviet heavy tank, while the T-54 went on to basically spawn all the major Russian MBTs of the Cold War. Meanwhile, the IS-4, with a distinctively WWII-vintage layout... well, also according to that article, there are still some IS-4 turrets refitted with 100mm guns in place as fixed gun batteries along the border with China...  :P

Lyonsb2000 #47 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 13:16

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 8679 battles
  • 44
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011
Everything I read sounds good. Great Job WoT! Only thing I'd still like to see are 5man platoons and another game type or two.

redfromsc #48 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 13:37

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 76613 battles
  • 50
  • [-GBU-] -GBU-
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011
Thank you for answering my question about the credit making ability of the T34 premium. I am very excited to hear that it will be on par with the KV-5 and Lowe.

kampfer91 #49 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 14:02

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16158 battles
  • 3,399
  • [AKAGI] AKAGI
  • Member since:
    08-18-2010
StugE-100 , slow to reload but pack a very powerful punch .
I love the sound of that !!!  :Smile-playing:

aznnoodle727 #50 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 14:04

    Captain

  • Players
  • 6669 battles
  • 1,474
  • Member since:
    01-30-2011

View Posteasy8tanker, on Feb 24 2012 - 06:08, said:

Tortoise wasn't really a tank destroyer it was a Super Heavy British tank.

Here it is:

http://ww2drawings.j...39-Tortoise.htm
The T95 was also a super heavy American tank, but they made it a TD anyways.

Ruecianus #51 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 14:31

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5214 battles
  • 129
  • Member since:
    06-24-2011
They didn't cover a very important question:

Will we get both T110 and Tier9 TD T30 RESEARCHED if we have the current T30 researched BUT NOT yet brought?

Can someone confirm this please? Thanks.

Cabban94 #52 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 14:40

    Private

  • Players
  • 4852 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    01-04-2012
Ok since i reaserched the kv-3 will i have to go trough kv-2 if i don't buy the kv-3 before update?Will the kv-3 be more powerfull and more armor? Thanks

Unabooboo #53 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 14:55

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 29930 battles
  • 361
  • [UGKB] UGKB
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View PostBilboTankins, on Feb 24 2012 - 12:47, said:

I think he meant 7.5% relative to a non-premium account that would be 5% since premium gives you a 50% bonus (so ((exp)*1.5)*5%) = exp*7.5%

No Preston_ is correct jinxx71 made an error stating you make 10%, actually your make 5%. And whether or not you have a Prem Account is irrelevant to this percentage. The rest of the answer was correct though, you make more Exp with an Prem Account, so 5% of a larger amount of Exp will give you a larger amount of Free Exp.

Example:

Amusing you fight a battle with a Standard Account :

Battle End Card Exp Received = 1000  

The Tanks Research amount increases +1000
Your Free Experience amount increases +50


The exact same battle but done with a Prem Account:


Battle End Card Exp Received = 1500



The Tanks Research amount increases +1500
Your Free Experience amount increases +75





UberTank01 #54 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 15:01

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 26946 battles
  • 1,133
  • Member since:
    11-26-2010
@Cabban94: KV-1 you have to research the KV-3; If you buy the KV-3 you'll get it at T7 and the T-150 Heavy Tank. Also the KV-3 will have much more health than it has right now since it is getting an upgrade in Tier. The KV1/2 is getting split in two so but you have to have the Bath tub turret to get the KV-2. Though the KV-3 probably won't get that much buffs besides health, since it's going up a tier.

DannyT251 #55 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 15:03

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 19531 battles
  • 974
  • Member since:
    04-30-2011
ETA on 7.2 supertest please!

Unabooboo #56 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 15:04

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 29930 battles
  • 361
  • [UGKB] UGKB
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View PostPotoroo, on Feb 24 2012 - 08:44, said:

It's fair enough you might not have firm answers to my questions but at least they are now on the table and hopefully the devs will give them due consideration before locking the British tree down.


+1. I think the devs really don't get just how much we were looking forward to the super platoons.

I'm pretty sure there would be more players upset with the 5 person platoons then were looking forward to them.  But at any rate there are ways of getting around this limit if you have external communications like Team Speak.  

If you really want to have more people on your team that you can talk to in game with out using something like TS then do a company battle and you can talk to as many as you like.



Potoroo #57 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 15:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 16592 battles
  • 4,631
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

View PostUnabooboo, on Feb 24 2012 - 15:04, said:

I'm pretty sure there would be more players upset with the 5 person platoons then were looking forward to them.
Since super platoons were only ever intended to fight each other (ie 3*5 v 3*5), I don't see why they would upset anybody who wasn't interested in them.

Quote

If you really want to have more people on your team that you can talk to in game with out using something like TS then do a company battle and you can talk to as many as you like.
Voice communications was never really the issue. It was always about quality of play. Our great hope was that the people most likely to form super platoons would be the better players fed up with the never-ending decline in the quality of pub battles. Clan Wars is utterly impractical for lots of us and Tank Companies have problems of their own. This has been discussed elsewhere in greater detail so there's no point rehashing it here.

fantigua #58 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 15:47

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 31440 battles
  • 315
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011

View Posteasy8tanker, on Feb 24 2012 - 06:08, said:

Tortoise wasn't really a tank destroyer it was a Super Heavy British tank.

Here it is:

http://ww2drawings.j...39-Tortoise.htm


just another snack for all the light tanks that have come out.  TD's and Arty are bait and this will just add to the smorgasbord.

safetyfirst #59 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 15:48

    Private

  • Players
  • 11835 battles
  • 1
  • Member since:
    07-11-2011
Anyone know if the T34 will keep it's 120mm when it goes premium?

David_90539 #60 Posted Feb 24 2012 - 16:09

    Captain

  • Players
  • 6495 battles
  • 1,399
  • Member since:
    05-18-2011
I can keep my IS-3 right?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users