Main page

 Priolia, on 12 June 2012 - 09:39 PM, said:

U know that when the WWII was fought ther was no czechs and slovaks...they lived in the same country:)..so that's why if u refer to them at that time u should name them czechoslovakians.

 inv1ss, on 12 June 2012 - 10:27 PM, said:

I don't really think that every time they say "Czechs" they recall history events and analyze what to say from that point of view...It's just became a custom somehow... it has nothing to do with abjection of either of these nationalities... And I would not like to emphasize who was dominating...
It's the same you would call all nations living on a territory of former USSR as Russians.. what actually you often do... so  this item really is not worth mentioning in this topic  ...
Edited by Priolia, 13 June 2012 - 10:36 AM.

Wonder if the super pershing will be anywhere near the type 59 in power....hope so....tired of Type 59 n00bs....

 Sagro, on 12 June 2012 - 05:30 PM, said:

- LoL try to play SOV tanks first and you will understand to have ammorack and gastanks in front ( at least you stay alive when your transmission damaged), slow aim time, abysmal accuracy (IRL d25t was more accurate than KwK 43 and from 1943 soviet optics was same as germans) and zero hull down capabilities. Sov tanks have plethora of drawbacks in this game.

 yourgreatestfear, on 12 June 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

- by US test d25t had more than 240mm armour penetration, search forum, Bojan published that information some time ago. And in the same time IS was invulnerable to KwK 42 and KwK 36.

 yourgreatestfear, on 12 June 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

- they ignore only cry babies, that what all devs doo, Blizzard, DICE etc. No skill matchmaking is their design decision, like Blizzard orientation towards casuals and DICE towards console gameplay, both that decisions cause constant outcry from old community but they dont give a shit. (and that only small examples)

 inv1ss, on 12 June 2012 - 10:27 PM, said:

- because there were no nation that was called czechoslovakians. Czechoslovakia was country of czechs and slovaks, with czechs being dominant in every way.

So, this is the guy who haven't fixed "0" criticals since beta hmm?.

 Xmasbeer, on 12 June 2012 - 08:22 PM, said:

This is how I understood it too.

Donforce would really own that american commentator so much he can probably out do him with so much ease .

 RussianBias, on 12 June 2012 - 11:02 PM, said:

And thats where Wargaming fails in all its effort to make the tanks work: They just dont understand the photocopies of trails and tank specs / results again and again!!! They also fail to understand or even read the arguments made by the community. Even if presented with facts and data, they refuse it as little kids who don't want to give up their lollipop.
In the data Wargaming is refering too and on which they based all their gunperformance, guns were tested on same armor plates with a fixed vertical 240 BHN RHA (or whatever fixed value they have found).

The Data they have on the guns and which they translated into the game are quiet often close to what everyone can find out, i dont say they have it completly wrong. No problem in the implementaion there. BIG Problem tho is that the tanks they implemented never had compareable armor in the first place. In Wargaming Universe the mighty Panther is made from the same material then the cheap casted T-34 and the even worst Shermans. Even a 100mm thick brick wall would offer the same protection then 100mm rolled and Tiger tank steel in this game. Every WoT tank from 1917 to the 50s has the same protection per mm, which is just ridiculous and messes up the whole balance as long as the guns rely on real life  data.

Let following sink in:

Pz IV Ausf G reached the insane value of 520 Brinell hardness thanks to the late war gas-oxigen-flamehardning (resulty from british trails)
T-34 (/85) reached 350 to 440 Brinell hardness (highly dependend on factory and year, british trails again)
Shermans just 240-260 Brinell hardness (Aberdeen standard figure since it was basicly the same steel for all US tanks at this time)

Steel hardness, next to thickness, is the main spec considering how well steel can be penetrated. To penetrate higher steel hardness you need high velocity and special hardend shells, both russians simply did not have at the timeframe we talk about. The mighty D25-T failed BIG TIME penetrating hardend steel armor like the Panther 1 or even tanks like the IS-X had, while the 7.5 cm KwK 42 L/70 or the 88 L 56 had no trouble at all vs the best steel of its time in most situations. Russia knew that and used large caliber HE-Ammo vs tanks, prefering disabling them instead of penetrating.

It makes no sense to refer to tons of gun trails for your penetration logic if you just ignore the factor steel hardness and dont bother translate it into the effective armor calculations. Thanks to their limited data and understanding in Wargamings little world all tanks are designed with ~250 Brinell armor, which is a huge buff for russian low speed guns with large caliber. This however brings us the unexpected unbalance of tanks which history knows for a fact to be inferior or superior vs the usual suspects.

What sounds like Nerd arguments actually lead us into the whole insanity of prototype /never used guns on well known tanks just to get some explainable balance with this messed up values. Thats why proven superior tanks like Tiger, Panther and Jpz IV in this game do regulary underperforming vs their oppenents. If you take RL-data for one side of the barrel and can't manage to implement near RL data on the receiving end you are bound to fail.

I dont expect the majority of you people to understand all of it, and its not even important for the players to do so. But Wargaming should overcome their egos and really should start to READ more. Its not whining to state facts, i dont demand any buffs etc. Most people who write about those issues just want to make Wargaming understand and getting frustrated with the ignorance and cheap answers to avoid any work in development. Sad also they don't see how much a little community-development communication could improve the gameplay and happiness on both sides.

PS: Keeping in mind that this is and always should be an arcade game with heavy real life reference but freedom in balancing. There would be an additional, simple instrument for balancing tanks without made up guns or prototype features. Give tanks an armor effectivness factor on the thickness, which will be mitigated by shell velocity and depends on the nation & production years of the model. This way you even could make the classics work with the original modules and could cut back on ridiulous prototypes. ... just an idea which i would implement as working software developer.
Edited by yourgreatestfear, 13 June 2012 - 07:03 AM.

it isn't possible to make destructive enviroment maps? only God can make that? lol tell that to DICE....

maybe he should stop using sedatives....

Can't wait that new modified M26!

I should use that 99million gold, free exp, and silver account... lol

Is there a way to submit new questions for future videos? I've got a few of my own...

Let's hope they put their money where their mouth is. If so, i am enthousiastic, especially about the historic battle events.

 Lito, on 12 June 2012 - 05:11 PM, said:

He was so bored... As I am about him. "If we see a problem we buff the tank, as long as it isn't german, because they kicked our butts in WW2 so hard we are still crying about it 70 years later".

 LordBaxter, on 13 June 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

Usually they respond only to questions from russian forum.

That look longer than I imaged it would, comments are now disabled on youtube lol.
"Criticism? no comments for you!"
Edited by badbits, 13 June 2012 - 11:58 AM.

 SpiderXoo7, on 13 June 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

There is an important difference between BF3 and WoT: BF3 is working on a "one game per server" basis, while WoT is running approx. 2000-3000 simultaneous games¹ on one cluster.
Try to ask DICE to host 2000-3000 active BF3 servers on a single cluster in one datacenter.

¹ last time the EU WoT client displayed the number of battles on the cluster, it went up to ~1800 with 82k online players; today we have even more active players on EU cluster and I think WN said somewhere, that each russian cluster handles over 150k players

Probably the best WG video so far imho.

yourgreatestfear you're my man!