Jump to content


WG Q&A Digest from Reddit


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

WindSplitter1 #1 Posted 09 July 2019 - 01:50 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18873 battles
  • 3,299
  • [DTPT] DTPT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

"Your" welcome:

 

Q: Wargaming should remove the retraining cost for tech tree tanks from Tiers 1,2,3 and 4. When new players start a new account they get a 100% crew. That's great... except you only need to play tier 1 1-5 games. Tier 2 don't last very lone, Tier 3 takes a little longer. Tier 4 takes a decent amount of time. At that point it is worth it to keep the same crew from Tier 4 to Tier 5. I was trying to help a new player understand the crew system (Thier crew was 81% in the tank); after helping them understand they decided it was best off to just quit because they don't have the time to invest in doing that. P.S. The Crew system is bad and it will be until next year that we hopefully get a change/revamp.

 

A: We promised to rework entire crew system and we are working on that. The new system contains solution to this as well as many other issues with crew


Q: Why doesn't Wargaming like to rebalance (not buff) premium tanks? The T26E4 Super Pershing was rebalanced several years ago with a limited time offer to sell the tank for its full worth in gold. That seems like a very fair thing to do. Beyond adjusting some of the more problematic premium tanks such as the Object 252U, Skorpion, and E-25, it seems that some tanks would be better off being made into regular non-premium vehicles as part of branches in the tech trees.

 

A/Eekeeboo:Situation with changing of characteristics of premium tanks is quite a complex problem to have. We are carefully looking in every case in all the regions all the time. For example, 252U in CiS is being considered an average vehicle and we often hear requests on buffing it up. Scorpion is a powerful glass cannon which punishes its owner a lot for even minor mistakes and requires quite a skill for effective play.

 

However, we admit that E-25 is a problematic one (though the tank is not as popular as it is commonly believed). So, we are trying to find a solution to get it in line. The T26E4 approach you've mentioned is one of the solutions we're considering.

 

As for transferring premium into non-premium vehicles, it is hardly an option unless a vehicle is completely bought back from all of its owners (including people who have left the game), as such a dramatic change of vehicle's properties might lead to serious legal issues for the game.


Q: Can we please get assistance for breaking the wheels on the race cars? Please. If my 155mm shell isn't enough to do damage after hitting the wheel a little assisted damage would heal the wound faster.

 

A: That is actually a good point. Let us investigate this further.


Q: What is the current state of the revisions coming to crew mechanics?

 

A: It is in progress. Our first take was too dramatic, and we went too far with our ideas. The following design was way too conservative, and we figured out it won't satisfy you guys as well as us. So now, we hope we are on the right track with the changes. Stay tuned for more information.


Q: With the new ammo changes introduced, are we going to see the super heavies with non-existent frontal weakspots (coupolas/lower plates) added weakspots to them ?

 

A: If new balance changes to ammo and HP goes live, we will have to look into all the vehicles and their behaviour in the new meta. We cannot give a definite answer at the moment.


Q: Question: Considering how some older premiums have already received buffs ( Pz 58 Mutz, STA-2 as the latest examples ) is there anything planned to say amx cdc, T34, Löwe and so on?

These tanks are surpassed by a lot of tanks in their performance and statistics already, Like comparing the Progetto M35 46 and the CDC theres really no contest, or T34 to any other high alpha heavy tank.

 

A: We are constantly working on actualizing premiums to current meta game. Currently we are running sandbox tests of new balance for all tiers and vehicles. Whatever the outcome of the tests is: we will balance all the vehicles up to a new scheme. If it doesn't go to prod, we will do a balancing up to a current scheme.


Q: Arty: Nobody likes to have 3 arty in one battle. Are there any plans for reducing the max number of artillery pieces in one match?

 

A: With current MM we are trying to make sure that 3 arties battles as well as 0 arty battles happen with predictable regularity. No plans to change the limit from 3 to 2 at the moment.


Q: With the addition of map black listing, is there any data being collected around what maps are commonly blacklisted and any possible correlations, or interesting information you can share? Or potentially if data is being collected if it’s being used to help inform any changes to maps or the game?

 

A: Yes, we are using this as data source. We are also conducting surveys from time to time and were quite puzzled that many of the blacklisted maps actually were on top of maps from the survey results. Soon we are planning to share some data with players.


Q: Might some reward tanks be made available in the Bonds shop? There are rare vehicles like the IS-5 and the T23E3 that I would very like to get my hands on, but I've missed out on getting in the past.

 

A: Yes, that is exactly the idea for Bonds shop content. We had some tech issues with Bonds shop operations, so it did not go live in 1.5, however we hope to get it fixed soon and at the moment we are finalizing the first batch of offers for the shop.


Q: Any plans for the Chieftain Mk.6 tech tree tank?

 

A: Not at the moment.


Q: Any plans on balancing Chieftain, 279e, and 907? Currently they massively outperform tech tree tanks.

 

A: This issue is quite delicate. From one side those tanks are rewards for high-end activities, so players expect them to be quite powerful. And they are.

However, one cannot say that those tanks have no weak spots to counter them in battle. From the other side, while some tanks are possessed only by top skilled players, it is hard to make conclusions that they massively outperform the others.

 

For example, Batchat which is not quite in current meta is a powerhouse if controlled by a top skill player. At the moment we are also conducting a series of Sandbox tests to validate some new ideas for balance. With the help of these tests we are trying to find a more generic solution on how to create an attractive interesting reward vehicle that won't feel as unfair as they sometimes feel now.


Q: Are there plans for a Japanese tank destroyer branch? They could easily fill one out and I believe it would be far less controversial than the heavy line.

 

A: Yes, we are looking into it.


Q: Are there any plans to reintroduce 9.22 maps which were removed in 1.0, such as Pearl River and Swamp?

 

A: Right now, we are looking what maps should be next, Pearl River is one of the candidates.


Q: Will tracked light tanks get their top speed back from when most of them were nerfed in 9.18, with the introduction of wheeled lights seeing how they out perform tracked lights in both p/w and top speed?

 

A/Eekeeboo: At the moment we do not feel that tracked LTs as a class require a buff. We are currently testing our big rebalance initiative on Sandbox and if it proves our ideas to be right, it could lead to a significant change for all classes, LTs in particular. Thus we will be able to correct the balance between tracked and wheeled light tanks as well, if we continue to gather proofs it is indeed needed.


Q: Why are some tanks erroneously misnamed? The Object 279 (e) should be called the Object 726, the AMX M4 51 should be called the AMX M4 49 bis, and the IS-M should be called the IS-2Sh.

 

A: In many cases vehicles that never reached mass production or were cancelled in early prototype (or even tech requirement stage) have different names in different sources. This is especially true with experimental vehicles, like Obj 279/279(e)/726 when the same vehicle based on the archives, we have access to has changed its name several times based on document time or even origin, and some of abandoned names were also re-used later on. In any case, when selecting a particular name, we put our trust on our historians and the hard evidence we got on hands with legal means ;) But seriously, thanks for the question and the link. We'll definitely pass it to our guys for a double check.


Q/RagingRaptor: My question would be regarding Supertest. At the moment it is very one sided with only russian players.

Will there be a chance we get once again a Supertest with tankers from different nations? It could lead to more balanced tank and less of the so called "russian bias" and might sooth the community a bit. Over the last couple of years Supertest infos went from " Someone had to be a mole and leak the info" to WG straight up posting almost all new things on their forums themselves.

 

And as a follow up question. When the Supertest would open up, will WG allow for example YouTubers and Streams in to let them make videos and opinions on it? I like what the Sandboxserver is doing in the sense of that it is basically a no-NDA environment and everybody can see what is going to happen to World of Tanks.

 

A: As you probably know, our main production force is based in Minsk, Belarus. And lots of our employees with limited English skills. So, it is much more effective to organize and support ST in Russian language. However, we understand that we definitely need to hear voice of community, thus we have different testing instrument. Supertest is used more for our internal tasks. As for SB, we use it lastly to test major changes that affect all the regions and players, you will see quite a few SB launches this year. For example, wheeled vehicles were tested on actual production servers.


Continues...

 


Edited by WindSplitter1, 09 July 2019 - 03:57 PM.


WindSplitter1 #2 Posted 09 July 2019 - 02:21 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18873 battles
  • 3,299
  • [DTPT] DTPT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

...Continuation:

 

Q: Since now all the tank models were ported to HD can we expect an ingame armour model viewer for the game like it's in WoWS or in that other tank game?

 

A: This feature is in pipeline.


Q: Are you planing on fixing invisible textures on edges of terrain, rocks, buildings etc. that make you peek a little more when wanting to take a shot behind them? They are transparent but shots don't go through them. This problem has occurred since introduction of HD maps, and since hasn't been resolved.

 

A: Definitely yes. There is a problem with matching Havoc body with our terrain. We are working with Havoc team to solve it.


Q: Are you planning improvements to the penetration indicator? It does not appear to accurately report penetration with HEAT vs spaced armor. Nor does it report overmatch as a separate condition/color from penetration.

 

A: For spaced armour this is quite a heavy calculation in real time. As far as we remember, it should work properly for overmatch, let us double check.


Q:  (...) WOT Premium Account. However, the fact that the x3 modifier experience increase goes to the vehicle instead of towards crew training is very frustrating, especially when its an Elite Vehicle / Tier X vehicle, and you are trying to grind up the crew skills with the 'accelerate crew’s training' option.

I understand that you don't want players swapping out crews, then applying the x3 bonus, but can't you just give us a second checkbox for 'Premium Account: Accelerate your crew’s training with x3 exp bonus?', and if the checkbox is set, the XP gets applied to the crew training automatically at the end of the winning match?

 

A: The core issue is that this bonus might be applied way after the actual battle happened and a player might manipulate a crew meanwhile like move it, disband, etc. As we have failed to find a good answer initially, we made the bonus ineffective towards crew training. We believe we have a good solution now and we are currently working on the fix. It will go live shortly.


Q: I'm on of the few players who has all 3 tier 8 cw tanks, one of which I payed 12k gold for. Any plans on buffing them?

I know this is not relevant to many people but the dust on my IS-5 is a foot deep

 

A: This is something we are considering at the moment.


Q: Have you ever considered a separate class for super-heavy tanks

 

A: We do not consider to make a separate class for those. However, we understand that these tanks are different from other heavies, so Matchmaker has special rules for those tanks, and we are working on communication system improvements that will allow players to tell allies "Achtung! Maus!" much easier than it is now.


Q: What can you tell us about wheeled vehicles? What is Wargaming's current perception of them? When might we expect more wheeled vehicles added to the game? Has Wargaming considered making them their own class (ex: Armored Cars)?

 

A: We are carefully looking into the data and are happy with wheeled vehicles performance at the moment. It had some issues in Frontline mode and we are addressing those. As for the new wheeled trees, it is too early to say something. However, we do not see it necessary to create a new class, since wheeled tanks have same purpose on the battlefield as light tanks.


Q: I'm sure you guys get fan-made tech trees and branches all the time. What are some things you look for in these proposals? What makes for a good fan-made tech tree?

 

A:With every tech tree at least for the past few years we are trying to reach both gameplay diversity (hence new mechanics for Swedes and Italians etc) and a certain grade of historical accuracy at the same time. The latter means that we are constantly looking for legally acquirable hard evidence (documents, photocopies, letters, military protocols and so forth) that could give us a solid ground for a new tree / branch composition.

 

For example, it took us three years of working together with some Polish military institutions to build a Polish tree that is composed of something original, not just modernized versions of USSR tanks Polish army was using past WW2.

 

Now, back to your question. A good fan-made tech tree in our eyes should meet both the above criteria: be contrast enough from the gameplay POV and be based on some solid evidence that does not require our guys breaking into classified archives and James Bonding blueprints from there to obtain ;) Still, the community efforts are often serving as the source of ideas and inspiration both for design team and our historians that do field studies across the globe.


Q: Upcoming tank: Will the ST-II be a replacement for the IS4 and if so will the IS4 become a legacy tank like the Fv215b/FV215b 183 and Foch155?

The tank was already leaked from the supertest allot of us would like to keep the IS4 and also know if the ST-II is planed to be replace the IS4.

 

A: If ST-II and other double-barrelled vehicles will make it into the game, they will form a separate sub-branch.


Q: Might it be possible for some tanks to be researched by tanks of other nations? For example, might I be able to research the British Firefly from the American M4A3E8 (at an increased xp cost)? This might be a way to add nations to the game that would otherwise be unable to have complete tech trees of their own.

 

A: You have just hit a bullseye. Seems you've got access to one of the designs we have on the table for a while ;) Still, at the moment we are pursuing somewhat different solution as we believe it will allow us to reach the same goal w/o making the trees even harder to read than they are now.


Q: Are there any materials to suggest it's possible we might see additional tank branches for the Czech, Japanese, Italian, or Polish tech trees?

 

A: There are some indeed, not for all the nations you've mentioned though. At the moment we are in progress with Japanese TDs and looking for opportunities with Czech and Italian trees as well. Once we have something solid on hands, we'll make it public ASAP.


Q: Since WG has teased us with changes to E-100 line, it is implied that changes to Tiger 1 and Tiger2 are in sight. What kind of parameters of said tanks does WG plan to change? If you cant answer that question, at least tell us how soon can we expect the rebalancing of the E100 branch. Don't touch E-75. It's good as is. :(

 

A: Currently we are running sandbox tests of new balance for all tiers and vehicles. For now, we are holding back some changes, but definitely will apply them when new balance appears. Or in case it does not go live, we will make them to current scheme.


Q: Seal clubbing. Do you have plans on fixing it? I'm not referring to seasoned players who just started grinding a line but to those who already have higher tiered tanks on the same line playing on lower tier games. This essentially discourages a lot of new potential players that will populate the game.

 

A: We have finally got to this issue and planning to address it (relatively) soon.


Q: When might we expect some premium tanks to change nationalities? I know there's been talk of the Rudy becoming a Polish tank. But others like the FCM36Pak40 and the 105 LeFH18 B2 are German conversions, not tanks of French design.

 

A: This is coming soon.


Q: Has Wargaming considered a combined "Latin American + Spainish" tech tree? This could be a way to get tanks from Brazil, Spain, Uruguay, and Argentina into the game, amongst others.

 

A: We did. We believe we have a better answer now to how to introduce some specific tank variants into the game, and will be happy to present it to the community soon

A/Eekeeboo: Well, we did. While doing it we believe we've found a better solution to the problem you rose. We hope to announce it to all of you guys really soon.


Q: On the subject of light vehicles: any chance for the lower tier light tanks to get their "fun guns" back (i.e. VK 28.01's 105mm derp, MT-25's and 59-16's low-pen autoloaders, SP I C's autoloader [maybe on the HWK as well?], etc.), and/or top speed nerfs reverted? While the light rework was nice to get tier 10 lights (and I love most of the tier 9s), many of the lower tiers all feel the same to play (especially at tier 6, where they are nearly identical to one another, save for the AMX 12 t), and - coupled with the much more limited top speeds - no longer have as much "fun factor" to them, making them feel a lot less interesting/rewarding to play post-rework.

 

A/Eekeeboo: Hopefully, past the big balance paradigm shift, we are trying to validate now. If it turns out to be something solid, the next steps would include low and mid tiers re-balance and role adjustments guaranteed. Unless the tests on Sandbox fail, we'd rather avoid doing multiple out of sync increments on specific nations/vehicle classes


Honourable Mentions:

  • WG wants (but not working on) British WVs and other types of WV are possible
  • Bond's Shop is ready but has some tech issues
  • WG didn't want FL to become a grindfest. 2020 will be different
  • New tech (autocannons, recoilless rifles) renders "classic" vehicles obsolete, according to Eek.
  • China and US are tough nations to find tanks to. WG is marching on them but slowly.
  • FV215b is likely to show up in the Bond's shop
  • WG is negotiating with GuP it seems...
  • Team damage 15 minutes of fame are almost up

 


Edited by WindSplitter1, 09 July 2019 - 04:00 PM.


The_Naa #3 Posted 09 July 2019 - 02:51 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 6745 battles
  • 1,040
  • [QSF-L] QSF-L
  • Member since:
    11-10-2017

View PostWindSplitter1, on 09 July 2019 - 02:21 PM, said:

 

  • WG is negotiating with GuP it seems…

 

Sweet!



r00barb #4 Posted 09 July 2019 - 03:00 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 26706 battles
  • 10,811
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015
Thanks for posting this, WindSplitter! :great:

staurinsh #5 Posted 09 July 2019 - 03:50 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 34054 battles
  • 251
  • Member since:
    01-21-2012
Pointless to read, because all the time is the same "We are carefully looking into the data", "soon"  and "Not at the moment". Years is going by, but russian [edited]stays the same. If you ignore the same problems year by year, then there is something wrong with you. But, if you look at those 2 countries, russian and belarus, look at their economics and management style, then there is answer, why game is going down year by year.

LordMuffin #6 Posted 09 July 2019 - 03:56 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 50649 battles
  • 12,694
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011
What I got was.
WG have no intention of creating a game where the tanks of a tier is of similar power but have different advantages and disadvantages against each other. They are completely fine with certain tanks being overpowered.

fwhaatpiraat #7 Posted 09 July 2019 - 04:18 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 55612 battles
  • 1,350
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View PostLordMuffin, on 09 July 2019 - 03:56 PM, said:

What I got was.
WG have no intention of creating a game where the tanks of a tier is of similar power but have different advantages and disadvantages against each other. They are completely fine with certain tanks being overpowered.

This. And this is nothing new. Since I started playing the game it already was like that. What is much more annoying is that WG acts like they do give a *edited* about balance, (EU) players and such, while it is clearly not.



Maschinenkanone #8 Posted 09 July 2019 - 04:40 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 43079 battles
  • 344
  • [MBEV] MBEV
  • Member since:
    05-17-2012

"From one side those reward tanks are rewards for high-end activities, so players expect them to be quite powerful."


 

Sorry guys, but this is nonsense. And even if it were true it would be a complete fail of game design to follow such an expectation.


 

Get ur balancing right, for heaven's sake! Dont u realize that ur commercial future depends on new players and not on those few at the very top?


 

 

 



Desyatnik_Pansy #9 Posted 09 July 2019 - 04:43 PM

    Bartender

  • Player
  • 17760 battles
  • 26,412
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostMaschinenkanone, on 09 July 2019 - 04:40 PM, said:

"From one side those reward tanks are rewards for high-end activities, so players expect them to be quite powerful."


 

Sorry guys, but this is nonsense. And even if it were true it would be a complete fail of game design to follow such an expectation.


 

Get ur balancing right, for heaven's sake! Dont u realize that ur commercial future depends on new players and not on those few at the very top?

 

I mean, I don't think it's nonsense to expect vehicles that you have to grind quite a lot for to be atleast competent. The problem is how over the top some of them currently are (especially compared to some others), but if you have to play a lot for vehicle it should atleast be worth it, whether by being a solid tank for the tier it's at, or by being unique.



Strizi #10 Posted 09 July 2019 - 04:50 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 41800 battles
  • 883
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011
WG doesnt think lights need a buff? Wohoo nothing else is to be expected from this company. And still no intention to nerf certain reward tanks? Expected.

Edited by Strizi, 09 July 2019 - 04:51 PM.


Noo_Noo #11 Posted 09 July 2019 - 04:59 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 22560 battles
  • 2,992
  • Member since:
    05-05-2013
Same person that said the Rheinmetall Panzerwagon was balanced

NekoPuffer_PPP #12 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:04 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 33380 battles
  • 3,715
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

View PostThe_Naa, on 09 July 2019 - 03:51 PM, said:

View PostWindSplitter1, on 09 July 2019 - 03:21 PM, said:

  • WG is negotiating with GuP it seems...

 

Sweet!

 



Balc0ra #13 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:04 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 70955 battles
  • 19,613
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Many of the same questions have the same answers each time. But... some new things still. 

 

I found this funny tho.

 

View PostWindSplitter1, on 09 July 2019 - 01:50 PM, said:

 

Q: Can we please get assistance for breaking the wheels on the race cars? Please. If my 155mm shell isn't enough to do damage after hitting the wheel a little assisted damage would heal the wound faster.

 

A: That is actually a good point. Let us investigate this further.


 

As was this never considered at all by WG? It's been pointed out in several topics here as is. I don't see why we should not get say 25% assist pr wheel. As if we slow it down to sub 20 km/h now. We get zero assist on it. And that's a lot of potential XP lost. Even more so considering how well wheels work as spaced armor now vs large shells. As most of the side is wheels.

 

Also find it interesting that they think wheeled lights are working fine. As in what way? Tier 6 to 8 inc the prem don't work at all for the active scout role. As 300 base means you have to be 120m or closer to spot anything more or less. They are great LT counters and bullies sure. But I can't say they nailed the active scout role on most of them. I would gladly lose some speed to improve the scout role a bit more. Way to crew depentent to be good active scouts atm. And thus most just yolo and die early in them on mid tiers. Or sit back and spam HE supporting the tracked lights.

 

And we got a response to why the crew are not getting XP from the premium 3x.  And the SP1C with the clip gun again? Yes please. It's the most useless tier 7 scout atm. As it has no DPM, no speed to get to good spots early. But it's still a good passive scout once it's on location. Even with 1200 DPM like the ELC 90 it would not be broken. And I sold my MT-25 when it lost the low caliber clip gun. No pen, but the burst damage was hilarious. 


Edited by Balc0ra, 09 July 2019 - 05:08 PM.


Paul_Kouadio #14 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:06 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 5188 battles
  • 157
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-03-2017
Another very interesting point is the way they intend to implement foreign versions of tanks, especially that it's coming quite soon. A real pity about the autocannon though. Would've loved to see them on Brit LTs (and I can't fathom why they consider autocannon to be too modern or whatever)

leggasiini #15 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:08 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 16929 battles
  • 6,382
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

 "At the moment we are in progress with Japanese TDs"

 

Q: Are there plans for a Japanese tank destroyer branch? They could easily fill one out and I believe it would be far less controversial than the heavy line.

 

A: Yes, we are looking into it.

 

Finally ;__;



WindSplitter1 #16 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:11 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18873 battles
  • 3,299
  • [DTPT] DTPT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View Postleggasiini, on 09 July 2019 - 04:08 PM, said:

 "At the moment we are in progress with Japanese TDs"

 

Q: Are there plans for a Japanese tank destroyer branch? They could easily fill one out and I believe it would be far less controversial than the heavy line.

 

A: Yes, we are looking into it.

 

Finally ;__;

 

We can edit our sigs accordingly.

 

Does anybody have a link to the AMA stream?


Edited by WindSplitter1, 09 July 2019 - 05:12 PM.


4nt #17 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:13 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27826 battles
  • 1,003
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View Postleggasiini, on 09 July 2019 - 05:08 PM, said:

 "At the moment we are in progress with Japanese TDs"

 

Q: Are there plans for a Japanese tank destroyer branch? They could easily fill one out and I believe it would be far less controversial than the heavy line.

 

A: Yes, we are looking into it.

 

Finally ;__;

Sorry legga, but do you really believe them to take it seriously? I mean, the British lt line is totally screwed up by taking most obscure of designs instead of readily available?



leggasiini #18 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:27 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 16929 battles
  • 6,382
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostWindSplitter1, on 09 July 2019 - 06:11 PM, said:

 

We can edit our sigs accordingly.

 

Does anybody have a link to the AMA stream?

 

Don't call it "success" just yet. They also said back in 2015 that Japanese TDs are planned. Yes, 4 years ago.

 

I'd call it success when they actually announce that they are truly coming. The news make me happy, yes, but I don't trust them till I actually see them in the game, considering how many times they have changed plans in past.

 

View Post4nt, on 09 July 2019 - 06:13 PM, said:

Sorry legga, but do you really believe them to take it seriously? I mean, the British lt line is totally screwed up by taking most obscure of designs instead of readily available?

 

I am ready for a disappointment. Some Japanese TDs are very obscure, but I don't mind obscure designs that much, and you need them for the line anyway. However, we all know what the high tiers should be (I.E, Ho-Ris or at least something related to the Ho-Ris), but knowing WG, the high tiers could very well be abominations based on the super-heavies, like this thing...

 

coming here to ruin your day with 1500 alpha 20cm AP shells

The worst part is that this is the tier X of Japanese wot community's proposed tech tree...



WindSplitter1 #19 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:30 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 18873 battles
  • 3,299
  • [DTPT] DTPT
  • Member since:
    02-07-2016

View PostWindSplitter1, on 09 July 2019 - 04:11 PM, said:

 

We can edit our sigs accordingly.

 

Does anybody have a link to the AMA stream?

 

I'm guessing Sir Queen's Park Ranger does not get some jokes...

Desyatnik_Pansy #20 Posted 09 July 2019 - 05:31 PM

    Bartender

  • Player
  • 17760 battles
  • 26,412
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View Postleggasiini, on 09 July 2019 - 05:27 PM, said:

The worst part is that this is the tier X of Japanese wot community's proposed tech tree...

 

And inb4 they choose it, despite them saying "we look at documents and whatnot". :trollface:






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users