Jump to content


Q&A with Slava Makarov - Head of R&D for World of Tanks PC


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

Ph3lan #1 Posted 01 August 2016 - 01:54 PM

    Senior Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 18177 battles
  • 578
  • Member since:
    11-17-2010

Hi guys!

 

Recently the Head of R&D for World of Tanks PC - Slava Makarov - took his time to answer some questions about the game on the channel of Jove, a Russian streamer, giving some insight into the future of World of Tanks. We thought you might also be interested in this and prepared a summary:

 

  1. What employee changes were there after the Rubicon update?

    • WoT development management was replaced. Currently, Slava Makarov acts as the Creative Director.

  2. What's your attitude toward arty?

    • The vehicle type should be redone in its essence. This is being experimented with on the Sandbox server.

    • We will not rush the introduction of changes from the Sandbox. None of the current changes will go live without improvements.

  3. Does the issue with super fast defeats exist?

    • Yes, and this is one of the main topics in testing on the Sandbox server.

  4. Will you educate players on how to play?

    • The task aimed at educating players, at least in terms of basic combat tactics, has started.

  5. How will you address the issue of repeating maps?

    • The issue with maps is a big one. It should be investigated and analyzed. Old maps may be removed or overhauled. The department that is currently making maps are doing their job really well.

  6. For the new matchmaker to work correctly, Tier X light tanks are required. These vehicles are being worked on really hard.

  7. How will you address the issue of premium shells purchasable with credits?

    • It is imperative that this situation is addressed, but the problem mainly originates from the inflation of the overall penetration and excessive visibility ranges, rather than from premium shells themselves. This is the cause that we will try to fix.

  8. Will the new balance be ready by New Year's?

    • Too soon to tell just yet. We are actively working on it. We're looking for good solutions and performing fine-tuning. We may test some new mechanics using the old balance.

  9. What to do with slow tanks?

    • There was a suggestion that such vehicles should be made faster.

  10. What is the current role of Michael Jivetc on the project?

    • Michael currently helps to figure out the condition of the project. He will not play any crucial role in the project in the future.

  11. Will the +/-25% scatter in penetration and shell damage change?

    • We can return to discussing this point after all the questions with engagement distance are solved on the Sandbox server.

  12. What will be done to personal missions?

    • Personal missions will be reviewed and those that are not working will be fixed. Slava thinks that the idea of personal missions in itself  is good. Implementation of some of them could be better and this is what he is going to focus on.

  13. Slava believes that this was the right thing to nerf the T-22 med. He was the originator of the idea. The vehicle was conceived for motivating players to play in the new Rampage mode. This is a bad idea to motivate players through the reward in form of an overpowered vehicle.

  14. Slava, what do you think about the Master of Orion release?

    • It is a normal 4X game that is suited for massive audience.

  15. Slava, tell a bit about Tanks 2.0?

    • We should first address all the affairs with the current version, and only then switch to the new one.

  16. With you introduce +/-1 battle level rules?

  • The new matchmaker may help to solve the problem with comfort of play. The new matchmaker is planned to have a restriction on creating Platoons consisting of SPGs, as well as a more defined tier distribution pyramid within a team.


Currently, Slava is responsible for the creative part of game design. In addition to game design, there exist other aspects of project management, such as marketing-related matters. The latter will be handled by a new employee who was part of the old team. Responsibilities of Anton Pankov have also been extended. Half a year is a normal term within the project's development processes. The September patch is already locked. The results of the team's work will be evident by the end of the year.

 



Cobra6 #2 Posted 01 August 2016 - 02:44 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16295 battles
  • 15,018
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Block Quote

It is imperative that this situation is addressed, but the problem mainly originates from the inflation of the overall penetration and excessive visibility ranges

 

No and yes, the standard AP/APCR shells are not a problem and were never a problem. Premium penetration, especially in T8+ tanks are the problem that is making armour irrelevant.

 

However, T10 medium tanks having the same or better viewrange than T8 light tanks is an actual problem indeed.

 

Nice read though.

 

Cobra 6


Edited by Cobra6, 01 August 2016 - 02:46 PM.


Laatikkomafia #3 Posted 01 August 2016 - 03:04 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 21299 battles
  • 4,224
  • [ELC-P] ELC-P
  • Member since:
    12-27-2010
"We can return to discussing this point after all the questions with engagement distance are solved on the Sandbox server."

So you mean either 50 or 55 meters?


8126Jakobsson #4 Posted 02 August 2016 - 04:11 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 61160 battles
  • 2,585
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
Tier X light tanks?!  :playing:

profes79 #5 Posted 02 August 2016 - 06:07 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 18590 battles
  • 8,596
  • [FENOM] FENOM
  • Member since:
    05-02-2012
First we had HT tier X; then balance was binned by adding tier X MT and TD; then it was binned once more with adding tier X arties...Not working? Well, let's add tier X LT - this should really solve the case...

lungustefan #6 Posted 02 August 2016 - 08:22 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 22502 battles
  • 1,267
  • [RO-DV] RO-DV
  • Member since:
    03-06-2011

Block Quote

 How will you address the issue of repeating maps?

 

you mean the same map repeating over and over again?

Temid23 #7 Posted 02 August 2016 - 09:47 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 50827 battles
  • 627
  • [G-STR] G-STR
  • Member since:
    12-20-2013

"Will you educate players on how to play? The task aimed at educating players, at least in terms of basic combat tactics, has started"

 

FINALLY

 

"How will you address the issue of premium shells purchasable with credits? It is imperative that this situation is addressed, but the problem mainly originates from the inflation of the overall penetration and excessive visibility ranges, rather than from premium shells themselves. This is the cause that we will try to fix."

 

Nope. Its a problem because you balance tanks around "normal" ammo penetration and allow players to SPAM gold ammo. Limit dmg compared to normal ammo or limit gold ammo load or do something else to make it worse choice in case you can pen with normal ammo.

 

Dear WG:

I don't want this game to be changed in 50m braindead brawl fest. I know its hard to imagine but not everyone likes magic broken as feck Russian meds and heavies....



5_InchFl0ppy #8 Posted 02 August 2016 - 10:24 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 40706 battles
  • 1,632
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    06-22-2012

To get this game back to a truly playable state you have to undo many of the changes made in the 2 years.

 

Here are some of the things I believe would make a huge and positive difference : 

 

  • The maps are sub-par, including most of the reworks, and lights are useless because of this. Tunnels are not fun. You have to change your design philosophy here.
  • Armour is not irrelevant at all. It's just your player base is mostly idiotic and have no idea how to use it. Granted premium ammo is a problem, but creating "hevvy tenk masterrace" is not the answer.
  • Accuracy is already piss poor, reducing it further will cause many players to leave (myself included). No one finds missing fun.
  • There is an absurd amount of RNG there is in this game, we don't want or need more of it. Reduce it incrementally.
  • If you insist on nerfing accuracy more, do it to the derp guns and other guns that are supposed to be inaccurate (IS-3 looking at you). Even if it takes months to balance things properly due to the number of guns, this is not a "one size fits all" mechanic.
  • Remove stats from in game, but allow them to be seen on service records etc. Nothing good comes from stats being shown in battle. Good players get focused, bad players are mocked. 
  • It's time to face up to the fact arty cannot be balanced. A "no arty mode" is the best way to move forward. At least consider trialling one.

 



4Romm #9 Posted 02 August 2016 - 06:21 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 37608 battles
  • 460
  • Member since:
    01-04-2014

View PostTac_p0liticallyCorrect, on 02 August 2016 - 09:24 AM, said:

...

 

  • Accuracy is already piss poor, reducing it further will cause many players to leave (myself included). No one finds missing fun.
...

 

I wouldnt consider it an overall accuracy nerf. Shots will just be more evenly distributed within the aiming circle (harder to snapshot for tanks with big aiming circle). So tanks has to aim fully (or at least better than now) to hit.  Its more realistic and it could help the game to be more diverse.

Of course this will bring the necessity to rebalance some tanks accordingly. But if done right, the game will benefit.

 

I am more concerned that the penetration loss over distance will reduce diversity in the way that it will reduce long distance shootouts (which are already rare because of the design of many maps).






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users